.::.•.,,:::/..:::,:;••.•:,.  •V;:v:^S^^?fli 

■'■■■"' ■■■■■'•■'•••■•"■•"■■■•■■■■- 

-5 

liiiri"!! 


811 


Cibrarjo  of  Che  trheolo^icd  ^tminaxy 

PRINCETON  •  NEW  JERSEY 


?i> 


PRESENTED  BY 

Dr.  J.C.  Backus, 
Baltimore ,   Md, 


BX  8937  .B34  1868 

Baird,  Samuel  J.  1817-1893. 

A  history  of  the  new  school 


HISTORY 


OP 


THE  NEW  SCHOOL, 


AND  OF 


THE  QUESTIONS   INVOLVED  IN  THE  DISRUPTION  OF 
THE  PRESBYTERIAN   CHURCH  IN  1838. 


SAMUEL   J.  BAIRD,  D.D. 


PHILADELPHIA: 
CLAXTON,  REMSEN  &  HAFFELFINGER, 

Nos.  819  &  821   MARKET   STREET. 
1868. 


-t'i 


-'     Q 


Entered  according  to   Act  of  Congress,  in  the  jear  18C8,  by 

JAMES  n.   BAIRD, 

In  the  Clerk's  OflBce  of  the  District  Court  of  the  United  States,  for  the  Eastern 

District  of  Pennsylvania. 


TTestoott  &  Thomson, 

Stereotypers.  Philada. 


TO 

EGBERT  J.   BRECKINRIDGE, 

AUTHOR  OF  THE  ACT  AND  TESTIMONY, 

JAMES   LExVGX   and   NATHAN   L.   RICE, 

MEMBERS   OF   THE   CONVENTION   OF   1835, 

FRANCIS  McFARLAND,   GEORGE  W.  MUSGRAVE, 
CHARLES  HODGE,  DAVID  ELLIOTT, 

JOSEPH  Mcelroy,  Nathaniel  ewing, 

WILLIAM  L.   BRECKINRIDGE,  WILLIAM  S.  PLUMER, 
AND   THE   OTHER   SURVIVORS 

OF 

A    GENERATION    TRIED    AND    FAITHFUL 

THIS    TRIBUTE 

TO 

THE   PRINCIPLES   WHICH   THEY   DEFENDED, 

AND 
THE   MEMORIES   OF  THE   SAINTED   DEAD, 

IS, 
WITH    AFFECTIONATE    VENERATION, 

INSCIilBEID. 


CONTENTS. 


s  PAGB 

Introduction 1 


CHAPTER    I. 
The  English  Heads  of  Agreement 19 

CHAPTER    II. 
The  General   Presbytery 38 

CHAPTER    III. 
The  Adopting  Act 53 

CHAPTER    IV. 
The  Preliminary  Act ,     72 

CHAPTER    V. 
The  Explanatory  Act  of   1736 87 

CHAPTER    VI. 
The  New  Side  Schism ; : 96 

CHAPTER    VII. 

The  Later  Doctrinal  History 109 

1*  V 


Vi  CONTEXTS. 

CHAPTER    VIII. 

PAGE 

TxiE  Assembly  and  the  Confession 124 


^                                        CHAPTER    IX. 
The  New  England  Churches !. 141 


CHAPTER    X. 
The  Plan  of  Union 154 

CHAPTER    XI. 
New  England  Theology 167 

CHAPTER    XII. 
New  Haven  Theology.. 184 

CHAPTER    XIII. 
The  Controversy  in  New  England 201 

CHAPTER    XIV. 
I'nACTicAL   Pelagianism 217 

CHAPTER    XV. 
The   Hopkinsian  Controversy 235 

CHAPTER    XVI. 
Growing  Uneasiness  in  the  Church 256 

CHAPTER    XVII. 
Earlier   Evangelic  Agencies 273 

CHAPTER    XVIII. 
The  Education  Question 283 


/ 


•  • 


CONTENTS.  Vll 

CHAPTER    XIX. 

PAGE 

Our  Missions  and  the  American  Boaud 297 

CHAPTER    XX. 
The  Home   Missionary  Question 310 

CHAPTER    XXI. 
The  System  op   Congregationalizing  Agencies 327 

CHAPTER    XXII. 
Barnes'  First  Trial 344 

CHAPTER    XXIII. 
The  Assembly  op  1831 357 

CHAPTER    XXIV. 
The  Western   Missionary  Question 376 

CHAPTER    XXV. 
Elective  Affinity  Ciurch  Courts 392 

•      CHAPTER    XXyi. 
The  Assembly  op  1834 404 

CHAPTER    XXVII. 
The  Act  and  Testimony 410 

CHAPTER    XXVIII. 
The  Convention  and  Assembly  of  1835 432 

CHAPTER    XXIX. 
The  Western  Foreign  Missionary  Society 447 


VIU  CONTENTS. 

CHAPTER    XXX. 

PAGE 

Discipline  Attemptkd 462 

CHAPTER    XXXI. 
Barnes'  Second  Trial 475 

CHAPTER    XXXII. 
TuE  Assembly  of  1836 489 

CHAPTER    XXXIII. 
The    Crisis 504 

CHAPTER    XXXIV. 
The  Reforming  Assembly  of  1837 526 


The  Disruption  of  1S3S 


CHAPTER    XXXV. 
537 


\ 


PREFACE. 


When  the  Pelagian  Controversy  in  the  Presbyterian  Church  came " 
to  an  end,  in  tlie  division  of_1838,  a  history  of  it  was  announced  by 
my  father,  the  Eev.  Thomas  D,  Baird.  No  person  in  the  Cljurcli  was 
more  favorably  situated  or  competent  to  execute  the  work  thus  under- 
taken. His  ministry  ran  parallel  Avith  that  controversy.  It  began  in 
South  Carolina,  in  1811,  amid  the  excitement  then  prevailing  in  con- 
nection with  the  case  of  W.  C.  I)ggj[is.  He  first  sat  in  the  General 
Assembly  in  1814,  and  witnessed  the  beginning  of  agitation  tliere,  in 
connection  with  the  case  of  Dr.  Ely.  He  was  a  member  again,  in 
1817,  the  next  occasion  on  which  the  controversy  came  into  that  court. 
Subsequently,  he  sat  in  the  Assemblies  of  1826,  1832,  1837,  and  1838, 
and  was  a  member  of  the  Missionary  Convention,  in  Cincinnati,  in 
1831,  and  of  the  Old  School  Conventions  of  1835,  1837,  and  1838,  ^f 
each  of  the  latter  of  which  he  was  an  officer.  These  facts  were 
pledges  of  his  profound  interest  in  the  questions  involved  in  the  eon- 
troversy,  and  of  abundant  opportunity  of  becoming  thoroughly  famil- 
iar with  the  facts ;  whilst  his  integrity  and  candor  were  constantly 
attested  by  his  most  zealous  antagonists.  He  had  collected  large 
materials;  but  had  written  nothing,  when,  on  the  8th  of  January, 
1839,  he  received  a  summons  to  lay  off  the  harness ;  and  departed, 
with  the  song  of  the  cherubim  on  his  lijjs. 

From  my  boyhood,  a  deeply-interested  observer  of  the  controversy, 
and  in  my  youth,  a  witness  of  the  Convention  and  Assembly  of  1835, 
and  of  the  Assembly  of  1836,  and  the  Old  School  conferences  of  that 
year,  I  was  early  led  to  plan  the  fulfillment  of  my  father's  unfinished 
work,  and  to  seize  every  opportunity  to  add  to  the  materials  already 
collected  by  him.  Twenty-five  years  have  elapsed  since  I  began  to 
write  with  that  view.  But  as  my  studies  and  researches  progressed, 
the  plan  was  enlarged;  and  for  many  years,  it  has  been  the  cherished 

A  *  ix 


X  PREFACE. 

liope  of  my  life  to  prepare  and  publisli  a  full  history  of  the  Presby- 
terian Church  in  this  country.  In  tliis  liope,  I  have  been  encouraged 
and  stiuuilated  by  the  sanction  and  urgency  of  a  number  of  the  most 
honored  and  eminent  men  in  our  Clnirch,  most  of  whom  now  rest 
from  their  labors.  The  requisite  preparations  have  been  pretty  fully 
made,  and  all  that  now  remains  to  the  accomplishment  of  the  enterprise, 
is  the  enjoyment  of  necessary  leisure  to  finish  the  composition,  from 
materials  already  digested  and  upon  plans  fully  matured. 

In  the  mean  time,  the  question  now  engrossing  our  Church,  touch- 
ing reunion  with  the  New  School,  has  developed  a  necessity  for  in- 
formation, which  is  inaccessible  to  the  Church  at  large,  and  which  is 
of  vital  importance,  in  order  to  wise  decisions  and  action,  at  the  pre- 
sent time.  I  have,  therefore,  emj^loyed  some  brief  leisure  redeemed 
from  laborious  official  engagements, — chiefly  during  a  month's  mid- 
summer vacation, — in  giving  the  i3resent  form  to  a  portion  of  my 
materials.  Neither  my  time,  nor  situation,  has  been  such  as  to 
enable  me  to  give  that  critical  revision  to  the  style  and  the  mimiter 
historical  details  which  I  should  have  desired.  But  I  have  no  fear 
that  the  essential  accuracy  of  the  history  can  be  successfully  im- 
peached, and  the  reader  will  make  due  allowance  for  any  minor 
defects,  which  may  be  discovered. 

There  are  doubtless  many  who  will  greatly  deprecate  the  present 
publication,  upon  a  principle  Avhich  is  near  akin  to  the  Romish  maxim, 
that  ignorance  is  the  mother  of  devotion.  To  such,  I  have  only  to 
say,  that,  if  there  are  any  lessons  clearly  taught  in  the  Word  of  God, 
one  of  them  is,  the  duty  of  the  Church  to  live  in  the  light  of  her  own 
history,  and  give  constant  and  anxious  heed  to  the  lessons  of  instruc- 
tion aifd"  admonition  which  it  conveys.  If  an  individual  would  be 
inexcusable,  who,  in  circumstances  of  peculiar  emergency,  should 
deliberately  disregard  and  ignore  the  lessons  of  his  own  experience, 
bearing  directly  upon  his  present  case,  lest  they  should  interfere  with 
the  dictates  of  the  moment's  impulses  and  interests, — much  more 
would  the  Church  of  God  be  guilty,  should  she, — entrusted  with  the 
great  interests  of  Immanuel's  kingdom,  close  her  eyes  and  stop  her 
ears,  to  the  facts  of  her  own  past  history;  because  they  may  run 
counter  to  the  plans  and  passions  of  the  hour.  The  voice  of  history 
,  is  the  voice  of  God  speaking  by  his  providence ;  and  let  him  beware, 
who  refuses  to  listen  and  to  heed. 

Throughout  these  pages,  the  two  parties  into  which  the  Church  was 
divided,  are  designated  by  their  well-k)iown  titles  of  Old  and  New 


PREFACE.  XI 

Scliool.  The  titles  are  not  only  appropriate,  but  originated  -with  the 
New  School  themselves.  In  New  England,  the  Edwardean  Theology- 
early  claimed  to  itself  the  name  of,  the  New  Divinity.  Dr.  Dutton 
in  his  history  of  the  North  Church  in  New  Haven,  states  himself  to 
have  been  informed  by  the  younger  Edwards,  that,  in  1777,  there  were 
in  Connecticut,  three  parties, — "Arminians,  who,  he  said,  were  a 
small  party ;  the  New  Divinity  gentlemen,  of  whom  he  was  called 
one ;  who  were  larger ;  but  still  small ;  and  the  main  body  of  the 
ministers,  which  were  Calvinistic."  In  March,  1826,  a  gentleman 
who  spent  a  short  time  in  New  Haven,  found  the  phrases,  "  Dr. 
Taylor's  views,"  "Our  views,"  "the  New  Divinity,"  familiarly  used 
to  indiente  the  theology  which  was  afterward  proclaimed  from  that 
institution. 

The  first  use  of  the  designations,  Old  and  New  School,  in  our  read- 
ing of  the  literature-  of  the  controversy,  occurs  in  a  writer  signing 
himself,  Zeta,  in  Dr.  Ashbel  Green's  magazine,  the  Christian  Advo- 
cate, for  1824.  The  editor,  in  a  notice  of  a  new  edition  of  Marck's 
Medulla  Theologise,  then  just  out,  had  remarked  that  "  the  author,  it 
is  well  known,  was  a  stanch  Calvinist,  of  the  old  school  ;"*  using  the 
phrase,  as  yet  free  from  any  party  significance,  in  a  well-understood 
and  obvious  sense.  Thereupon,  Zeta  says  to  the  editor — "  The  dis- 
tinction between  ^a  Calvinist  of  the  Old  School'  and  one  of  the  New, 
is  recognized,  I  see,  in  page  129,  of  your  March  number.  You  know 
that  our  Presbyterian  community  are  in  fact  divided — technically,  I 
hope,  not  essentially,  not  inimically,  not  toto  cceIo,j- — on  the  subject 
of  systematic  theology.  The  difference  is  not  at  all  so  great  as  the 
common  enemy  would  misrepresent  it;  nor  even  as  some  sincere 
brethren  have  supposed.  It  is,  also,  conscientious  on  both  sides;  and, 
therefore,  piety  to  our  common  and  glorious  Lord,  ought  to  constrain 
us  to  mutual  forbearance.  If  ever  there  was  a  jDroper  sphere  for  the 
exercise  of  this  lovely  grace,  it  exists,  at  present,  in  our  Church ;  and 
I  am  persuaded  that  in  proportion  as  the  two  Schools  become  ac- 
quainted with  each  other,  animosity,  jealousy,  and  scorn, — those  un- 
lovely passions  of  'the  old  man,' — will  subside,  and  be  gradually 
superseded  by  sensations  at  once  more  pleasant  and  more  pure. — 
'  And  Abram  said  unto  Lot,  Let  there  be  no  strife  between  me  and 

thee, — FOR  WE  BE  BRETHREN.'  "J 

*  Christian  Advocate,  1824,  p.  129.  t  By  the  whole  heavens. 

X  Ibid,  p.  208. 


XU  PKEFACE. 

Zcta,  tlius  commences  a  series  of  articles  on  the  atonement,  in  Vi'liicli 
he  recognizes  tlie  two  parlies  by  the  names  here  given.  The  articles 
seem  to  have  been  terminated  abruptly,  by  the  editor,  at  a  point  where 
-the  writer  began  to  develop  a  serious  departure  from  the  Confession  of 
Faith,  as  to  the  nature  of  the  atonement.  The  style  of  this  writer, 
and  his  sentiments  seem  clearly  to  identify  him  with  the  Rev.  S.  H. 
Cox,  D.  D.,  who,  in  the  Princeton  Eeview  for  October,  1831,  u.-es  the 
same  designations. 

lu  tlie  discussions  of  the  Assembly  of  1831,  and  connected  there- 
's,     with,  these  names  began  to  be  familiarly  employed,  and  have  con- 
tinued, since,  in  general  use. 

One  word  is  necessary,  as  to  the  theological  stand-point  from  which 
the  conti-oversy  is  viewed  in  this  history.  The  author  is  not  a  i^hilo- 
sophienl  realist,  as  has  been  assumed  of  late.  He  is  simi^ly  and  only 
a  disL-Iple  of  the  theology  of  the  Eeformation,  as  set  forth  in  the  stand- 
ards of  Westminster  and  the  writings  of  the  old  standard  divines.  A 
firm  and  unwavering  faith  in  tliose  doctrines  has  determined  the  light 
in  which  every  fact  has  been  viewed,  and  every  doctrine  stated  in  this 
work. 

In  making  quotations,  it  has  been  a  rule  of  inflexible  observance, 
to  retain  ifithout  modification  the  emphasis  of  the  original.  Where  it  was 
desirable  to  call  special  attention  to  a  clause  in  such  a  passage,  it  has 
been  done,  in  a  few  instances,  by  repeating  the  passage  with  the  neces- 
sary enjphasis. 

As  the  work  is  designed  as  much  for  the  common  people  of  God, 
as  for  the  learned,  marginal  translations  are  given  of  all  phrases 
derived  from  the  learned  languages. 

•  Under  the  designation  of  "  ITewit  MS.,"  references  are  made  to  a 
volume  of  copies  of  an  original  correspondence  with  which  I  was 
favored  by  my  late  venerated  friend,  the  Rev.  Dr.  Nathaniel  Hewit, 
of  Bridgeport,  Connecticut. 

With  profound  devotion  to  the  Avelfare  of  our  beloved  Church,  and 
prayer  for  the  peace  of  Israel,  this  history  is  now  submitted  to  the 
candor  of  the  reader. 

Stauxton,  Va.,  July  30,  1868. 


r 


INTRODUCTION. 


The  New  School  controversy  arose  from  the  introduction  into 
the  Church  of  new  doctrines,  wliich  threatened  the  overthrow 
of  the  whole  system  of  saving  faith,  contained  in  our  standards. 
Strictly^and  iundamentally,  the  issue  was  doctrinal.  The  ques- 
tion dependent  was  not,  indeed,  as  to  the  truth  or  falsehood 
of  the  theology  of  the  New  School.  Upon  that  issue,  the 
number  of  adherents  of  the  party  would  have  been  com- 
paratively small.  But  it  was,  as  to  the  allowance  of  those 
doctrines,  in  the  Church.  In  this  light,  it  was  viewed  by  the 
Old  School,  from  the  beginning,  and  set  forth  in  their  various 
documents,  particularly  in  the  Memorial  and  Testimony  of  1837. 
It  was  in  this  light  that,  during  the  controversy,  the  subject  was 
treated  by  the  New  School,  always,  and  officially  expounded  in 
their  "Declaration"  of  1839.  It  was  upon  this  issue  of  doc- 
trinal toleration,  that  they  were  able  to  rally  the  whole  strength 
of  the  party,  in  every  instance,  for  the  defence  of  those  who 
were  impeached  of  unsoundness  in  the  faith.  The  disorders 
introduced  by  the  Plan  of  Union  were  held  in  comparatively 
light  regard,  viewed  as  mere  departures  from  the  order  of  our 
Church.  It  was,  as  the  means  of  introducing  and  giving  cur- 
rency to  doctrinal  error,  that  they  became  the  occasion  o?  anxiety 
and  alarm.  The  question  between  the  boards  and  institutions  of 
our  Church  and  those  of  voluntary  origin  and  constitution, 
originated,  and  derived  its- whole  significance,  from  the  fact  that 
the  former  were  set  for  the  promulgation  and  defence  of  the 
gospel  as  exhibited  in  our  standards ;  whilst  the  latter  were 
devoted  to  the  propagation  of  the  undefinable  principles  of 
/' liberal  Prenbyterianism. " 


Z  INTRODUCTION. 

For  a  number  of  j'ears  after  the  division,  the  distinctness  with 
which  these  facts  were  recognized,  and  the  \dvid  memories  cher- 
ished of  the  unhappy'  scenes  of  controversy,  inevitably  conse- 
quent upon  such  doctrinal  diversities  as  existed,  precluded  any 
idea  of  reunion,  unless  ui)on  coiidition  of  an  agreement  in  doc 
trinal  sentiments  and  policy,  which  all  felt  to  be, for  the  present 
generation, beyond  hope. 

But,  as  years  rolled  on,  the  actors  in  the  controversy  have  i 
generally  passed  off  the  stage.  The  memories  of  false  doctrines 
and  their  unhappy  consequences  have  faded  away ;  and  the 
separation  of  the  two  bodies  has  prevented  that  intimacy  of 
intercourse,  by  which  a  knowledge  would  have  been  retained  in 
the  common  mind  of  the  Church,  of  current  errors,  still  cher- 
ished and  disseminated,  as  of  old.  On  the  contrary,  the  pressure 
of  embarrassments  resulting,  in  various  respects,  from  the  divi- 
sion, has  been  increasingly  felt ;  inducing  a  growing  disposition 
to  disparage  the  grounds  of  separation,  and  to  exalt  the  desirable- 
ness, and  insist  upon  the  practicability,  of  a  reunion. 

In  consequence,  the  subject  had  been,  from  time  to  time,  pre- 
sented, with  more  or  less  earnestness,  to  the  consideration  of  the 
Assembly.  At  length,  in  1866,  it  came  under  consideration,  in 
the  Committee  of  Bills  and  Overtures,  in  consequence  of  meujo- 
rials  received  from  the  Presljyteries  of  Leavenworth,  Muncie, 
New  Lisbon,  Madison.  Erie  and  Oxford.  If  the  proper  time 
had  come  for  action  on  the  subject,  the  resolutions  reported  by 
the  committee  were  unexceptionable,  and  the  principles  therein 
stated  were  such  as  must  commend  themselves  to  every  true 
friend  of  the  Church  and  of  the  cause  of  Christ. 

"L  This  Assembly  expresses  its  ft'aternal  affection  for  the 
other  branch  of  the  Presbyterian  Church,  and  its  earnest  desire 
for  reunion,  at  the  earliest  time  consistent  with  agreement  in 
doctrine,  order  and  policy,  on  the  basis  of  a  common  standard 
and  the  prevalence  of  mutual  confidence  and  love,  which  are  so 
necessary  to  a  happy  union,  and  to  the  permanent  peace  and 
prosperity  of  the  united  Church. 

"2.  That  it  be  recommended  to  all  churches  and  church  courts, 
and  to  all  ministers,  ruling  elders,  and  communicants,  to  clierish 
fraternal  feelings,  to  cultivate  Christian  intercourse,  in  the  wor- 


INTRODUCTION.  3 

ship  of  God,  and  in  the  promotion  of  the  cause  of  Chriist,  and 
to  avoid  all  needless  controversies  and  contentions. 

"  3.  That  a  committee  of  nine  ministers  and  six  ruling  elders 
be  appointed,  provided  that  a  similar  committee  be  appointed  by 
the  other  Assembly,  now  in  session  in  this  city,  for  the  purpose 
of  conferring  in  regard  to  the  desirableness  and  practicability  of 
reunion  ;  and  if,  after  conference  and  inquiry,  such  reunion  shall 
seem  to  be  desirable  and  practicable,  to  suggest  suitable  mea- 
sures for  its  accomplishment,  and  report  to  the  next  General 
Assembly." 

To  these  resolutions,  the  Rev.  Dr.  Van  Dyke  proposed  an 
amendment,  to  include  in  the  negotiations  the  Southern  Presby- 
terian Church,  The  amendment  was  laid  on  the  table  and  the 
resolutions  were  adopted. 

The  committee,  appointed  by  the  Moderator,  in  pursuance  of 
these  resolutions,  consisted  of  the  Rev.  Drs.  J.  M.  Krebs,  C.  C. 
Beatty,  J.  T.  Backus,  P.  D.  Gurley,  J.  G.  Monfort,  W.  D. 
Howard,  W.  E.  Schenck,  V.  C.  Reed,  and  F.  T.  Brown,  and 
Elders  J.  M.  Ray,  R.  McKnight,  S.  Galloway,  H.  K.  Clarke, 
G.  P.  Strong,  and  0.  Beatty. 

The  overture  was  accepted  bj'-  the  New  School  Assembly,  and 
a  like  committee  appointed.  When  the  committees  met-,  they 
seem  to  have  ignored  altogether  the  primary  object  of  their 
appointment,  which  was,  "to  confer  in  regard  to  the  desirable- 
ness and  practicability  of  reunion."  Only  after  ascertaining 
these  points,  upon  conference  and  inquiry,  were  they  authorized 
"  to  suggest  suitable  measures  for  its  accomplishment."  But 
the  committee  seem  to  have  jumped,  at  once,  to  the  conclusion, 
that  the  consummation  was  both  desirable  and  practicable  ;  and 
thereupon  proceeded  to  enter  into  the  constructing  of  a  treaty 
of  union. 

Nor,  in  the  provisions  of  the  plan  adopted,  did  the  committee 
paj'-  any  more  regard  to  the  instructions  under  which  it  was 
appointed,  than  with  respect  to  the  preliminary  question.  Those 
instructions  contemplated  union,  only  upon  condition  of  "  agree- 
ment in  doctrine,  order,  and  policy,  on  the  basis  of  the  common 
standards."  A  very  different  basis  was  adopted  by  the  com- 
mittee. ""      ^ 


4  INTRODUCTION. 

When  the  two  committees  met,  that  of  the  Old  School  pro- 
posed as  the  basis  of  union,  a  strict  conformity  to  the  standards, 
in  doctrine  and  order.  This  basis  was  urged,  with  great  earnest- 
ness, upon  the  New  School  members ;  but  was  j&rmly  and  utterly 
repudiated  by  them.  The  Old  School  insisted  that  the  Confes- 
sion of  Faith  should  be  adopted  in  its  obvious,  fair,  historical 
sense.  The  New  School  claimed  that  it  should  be  adopted  in 
the  sense  in  which  it  has  heretofore  been  received  in  the  two 
churches. 

Finding  that  this,  and  nothing  less,  would  be  acceptable  to  the 
New  School,  it  might  have  been  supposed  that  the  Old  School 
members  would  accept  this  as  a  demonstration  that,  for  the  pre- 
sent, reunion  is  impracticable ;  and  so  report  to  the  Assembly. 
But,  instead  of  this,  the  New  School  conditions  were  accepted, 
and  a  plao^of  union  formed,  on  thatJ^sis.  During  the  contro- 
versy, whilst  the  charges  of  Arminianism  and  Pela^iaiiism  were 
brought  home  with  demonstration,  to  New  School  divines,  the 
attempt  was  once  or  twice  feebly  made,  by  way  of  foil  to  these 
charges,  to  impeach  the  Old  School  of  Antinomianism  and 
Fatalism ;  although  no  case  was  ever  specified,  and  no  proof 
ever  attempted.  Deriving  the  suggestion  of  its  language  from 
these  facts,  the  committee  recommended  the  following  as  the 
doctrinal  basis  of  union,  in  its  report  of  1867. 

"1.  The  reunion  shall  be  effected  on  the  doctrinal  and  eccle- 
siastical basis  of  our  common  standards;  the  Confession  of  Faith 
shall  continue  to  be  sincerely  received  and  adopted  '  as  contain- 
\    ing  the  system  of  doctrine  taught  in  the  Holy  Scriptures;'  and 
Y^^-.    its  fair,  historical  sense,  as  it  is  accepted  by  the  two  bodies,  in 
lJ     opposition  to  Antinomianism  and  Fatalism  on  the  one  hand,  and 
7^  _^;    to  Arminianism  and  Pelagianism,  on  the  other,  shall  be  regarded 
as  the  sense  in  which  it  is  received  and  adopted."     If,  the  fact 
that,  in  the  joint  committee,  this  paper  was  adopted  after,  and 
because  of,  the  refusal  of  the  New  School  members  to  accept  the 
standards  strictly,  and  the  very  language  of  this  article,  itself, 
were  together  insufficient  to  prove  that  its  intent  was  to  establish 
in  the  united  Church  the  "liberal"  principles   of  subscription 
contended  for  by  the  New  School,  it  was  only  further  necessary 
to  point  to  the  fact  that  these  precisely  were  the  terms  of  sub- 


INTRODUCTION.  5 

scription  set  forth  by  Mr.  Barnes,  on  his  trial,  and  sanctioned  by 
the  New  School  in  his  acquittal*  The  historical  sense  in  which 
the  two  parties  have  respectively  adopted  the  Confession,  will 
very  fully  appear  in  the  following  pages;  the  Old  School  always 
insisting  upon  the  strict  maintenance  of  the  doctrines  of  that 
formulary,  and  the  New,  from  the  first,  claiming  an  indefinite 
liberty  of  divergence  from  it. ''' 

The  terms  of  union  provided  for  consolidating  the  Boards  and 
committees  of  the  two  churches.  In  doing  this,  the  lists  of  the 
Boards  of  Publication  were  to  be  examined  by  a  joint  committee  of 
seven  from  each  body ;  and  if  three  of  either  committee  objected 
to  any  publication,  it  should  be  stricken  from  the  list.  That  is, 
in  the  committee  of  fourteen,  all  the  Old  School  members,  and 
four  out  of  seven  of  the  New  School,  might  vote  to  retain  Bos- 
ton's Fourfold  State.  But  if  a  minority  of  three  of  the  New 
School  committee  should  happen  to  dislike  the  emphasis  therein 
given  to  the  doctrine  of  imputation,  and  object  to  the  book,  it 
could  not  be  retained ; — a  scheme  well  adapted  to  render  the 
publications  of  our  Church  as  indefinite,  ' '  catholic' '  and  valueless, 
asjthose  of  any  "unsectariau"  voluntary  society  in  the  land. 

Bespecting  the  Seminaries  of  the  Church,  it  was  provided  that 
those  of  the  General  Assembly  should  be  permitted  to  place 
themselves  under  Synodical  control,  if  at  any  time,  they  should 
desire  it.  Those  belonging  to  the  New  School  were,  also, 
to  be  allowed,  when  they  choose,  to  place  themselves  under 
ecclesiastical  control.  It  will  be  found,  in  the  following  history, 
that  the  New  School  seminaries  originated  in  jealousy  of  eccle- 
siastical control,  and  in  opposition  to  the  doctrinal  strictness 
enforced  upon  those  established  by  the  Assembly.  The  plan,  in 
fact,  provided  that  they  should  retain  that  independence,  unless 
they  should  see  fit  voluntarily  to  surrender  it.  In  other  words, 
the  Old  School  seminaries  were  to  come,  at  once,  under  the  joint 
control  of  the  New  School ;  and  they  were  authorized  to  retain 
exclusive  control  of  the  others,  as  long  as  they  chose. 

One  additional  point,  of  fundamental  importance,  was  pro- 
vided for,  in  the  treaty.     During  the  controversy,  the  right  and 

*  See  below,  p.  480. 
1* 


6  INTRODUOriON. 

duty  of  the  PresbyterievS  to  be  fully  satisfied  as  to  the  qualifica- 
tions of  ministers,  coming  to  them  for  admission,  even  though 
bringing  "clean  papers,"  or  regular  testimonials,  were  insisted 
upon  by  the  Old  School,  and  denied  by  the  New  School.  The 
cases  of  Messrs.  Barnes  and  Beecher,  gave  signal  interest  and 
importance  to  the  question.  The  doctrine  of  clean  papers  was 
eiFectually  employed  by  Dr.  Peters  to  fill  the  Presbytery  of  Cin- 
cinnati, with  the  supporters  of  the  American  Home  Missionary 
Society.  Prior  to  tlie^rise  of  the  controversy,  the  right  of  Pres- 
byteries, though  unquestioned,  was  seldom  exercised  for  lack  of 
occasion.  Tlie  cases,  however,  of  the  Cumberland  and  New 
Light  heresies  in  Kentucky,  illustrated  the  pnncii)le  held  by  our 
Church  from  the  JDCginning.*  (Q'he  constitutional  right  of  Pres- 
byteries to  make  examination  of  applicants  for  admission,  was 
denied  by  the  New  School  Assembly  of  1834,  but  reaffirmed,  in 
1835.  i  In  1837,  it  was  made  imperative  on  Presbyteries  "  to 
examine  all  making  application  for  admission  into  their  bodies, 
at  least,  on  experimental  religion,  didactic  and  polemic  theology, 
and  church  government."  Such  has  continued  to  be  the  law 
and  practice  of  our  Church,  ever  since. 

No  sooner,  however,  did  the  New  School  separate  themselves 
from  the  Assembly,  in  1838,  than  they  decreed,  that  "Whereas, 
it  is  the  inherent  right  of  Presbyteries  to  expound  and  apply 
constitutional  rules  touching  the  qualifications  of  their  own  mem- 
bers, therefore, — 

"Resolved,  That  the  action  of  the  last  General  Assembly, 
making  it  imperative  on  the  Presbyteries  to  examine  all  who 
make  ai)plication  for  admission  to  their  bodies,  not  excepting 
ministers  coming  from  other  Presbyteries,  is  null  and  void."t 

If  the  doctrine  of  this  resolve  be  true,  that  of  the  Form  of 
Government  is  false,  which  expressly  assigns  to  the  Assembly 
the  prerogative  of  "  deciding  in  all  controversies  respecting  doc- 
trine and  disciphne."  Should  any  Presbytery  see  fit  to  fill  up 
tlie  ranks  of  its  ministry  with  Pelagians.  Arians  and  Socinians, 
and  its  eldership  with  unordained  ^'  committee-men,"  it  would, 
according  to  this  act,   be  in    the    exercise  of  its   "inherent 

*  See  below,  p.  136;  and  Baird's  Assembly's  Digest,  pp.  633,  641. 
f  Moore's  "New  Digest/'  p.  117. 


INTKODUCTION.  7 

right,! '^iind  ua  superior  court  would  be  entitled  to  interfere. 
The  doctrine  is,  in  fact,  Presbyterial  Independencj^ ;  and  is  much 
nearer  akin  to  Congregationalism  than  to  the  system  of  our 
standards,  Si^ch  is  the  theory  ;  and  the  practice,  as  experience 
has  fully  illustrated,  enables  one  unsound  Presbytery,  at  its  own 
discretion,  to  infuse  poison  into  the  whole  Church. 

On  this  subject,  the  treaty  of  union  was  couched  in  general 
terms,  which,  however,  to  those  who  understood  the  history, 
were  profoundly  significant.  It  provided  that,  "in  order  to 
avoid  the  revival  of  past  issues,  b3'  the  continuance  of  any  usage 
in  either  branch  of  the  Church,  that  has  grown  out  of  our  former 
conflicts,  it  is  earnestly  recommended,  to  the  lower  judicatories 
of  the  Church,  that  they  conform  their  practice,  in  relation  to  all 
such  usages,  as  far  as  consistent  with  their  convictions  of  duty, 
to  the  general  custom  of  the  Church,  prior  to  the  controversies 
that  resulted  in  the  separation." 

It  was  not  pretended  that  this  very  adroitly  phrased  paragraph 
had  reference  to  any  other  question  than  that  of  the  examination 
of  ministers;  and  when  reduced  to  plain  EngHsh,  it  was  a  pro- 
vision that,  "in  order  to  avoid  the  revival  of  that  issue,"  the 
Old  School  should  surrender  the  point. 

Such  were  the  essential  points  in  the  plan  of  reunion,  sub- 
mitted to  the  Assembly  of  1867.  By  the  Assembly,  the  plan 
was  sent  down  to  the  Presbyteries,  without  any  expression  of 
approbation  or  disapprobation,  in  order  to  afford  the  Church  "a 
full  opportunity  to  examine  the  subject,  in  the  light  of  all  its 
advantages  and  difficulties,  so  that  the  committee  may  have  the 
benefit  of  any  suggestions  which  may  be  offered,  before  making 
a  final  report  for  the  action  of  the  next  Assembly." 

Already,  it  was  evident  that,  on  this  subject,  there  were  two  I 
parties  in  the  Church ; — one  composed  of  those  who  hold  the 
union  to  be  of  paramount  importance,  and  the  maintenance  of 
Old  School  principles  of  altogether  secondary  consideration;  and 
the  other,  embracing  those  who  admitted  the  eminent  desirable- 
ness of  union ;  but  regarded  it  as  proper  and  justifiable,  only 
upon  condition  that  it  could  be  accomplished,  without  the  sacri- 
fice of  the  distinctive  principles  maintained  by  the  Old  School, 
during  and  since  the  controversy.     It  was,  further,  evident,  that,v 


8  INTRODUCTION. 

whatever  might  be  the  private  sentiments  of  the  members  of  the 
conmiittee,  there  was  not  one  of  them,  whom  the  latter  class 
could  regard  as  a  reliable  representative  of  their  views  and  prin- 
ciples. When,  therefore,  the  Moderator  was  about  to  fill  a 
vacancy  in  the  committee,  occasioned  by  the  illness  of  Dr.  Krebs, 
it  was  hoi)ed  that  the  claims  of  this  party  would  be  regarded, 
and  a  name  was  suggested,  of  one  of  the  most  worthy  and 
respected  pastors  in  the  Church,  as  a  representative  of  that  class. 
The  suggestion,  however,  was  disregarded,  and  the  committee 
retained  its  one-sided  character. 

By  a  strong  majority  of  the  Presbyteries,  the  Plan  of  reunion 
was  disapproved,  as  involving  a  surrender  of  sacred  principles, 
for  the  defence  of  which  our  Church  has  been  set  by  the  King  of 
Zion. 

The  joint  committee  again  assembled,  and  spent  several  daj^^s 
in  consultation.  Upon  the  adjournment,  it  was  announced  that 
the  conclusions  arrived  at  would  not  be  published  until  laid  be- 
fore the  two  x\ssemblies.  It  was,  however,  soon  rumored 
abroad,  that,  for  two  or  three  days,  the  Old  School  members  of 
the  committee  had  insisted  upon  terms,  in  accordance  with  the 
mind  of  the  Church,  as  ascertained  by  the  action  of  the  Presby- 
teries. Such  terms  had  been  utterly  refused,  by  the  New 
School,  and  the  committee  was  about  to  adjourn,  in  despair; 
when  the  same  hand  by  Mdiich  was  written  the  doctrinal  basis  of 
1867,  again  proposed  a  doctrinal  article,  upon  which  all 
united.  The  terms  thus  proposed  were  submitted  to  the  As- 
semblies of  1868,  and  are  now  before  the  churches  for  ac- 
ceptance or  rejection.  The  doctrinal  article  is  in  the  following 
words: — 

"1.  The  reunion  shall  be  effected  on  the  doctrinal  and  eccle- 
siastical basis  of  our  common  standards ;  the  Scriptures  of  the 
Old  and  New  Testaments  shall  be  acknowledged  to  be  the  inspired 
word  of  God  and  the  only  infallible  rule  of  faith  and  practice ; 
the  Confession  of  Faith  shall  continue  to  be  sincerely  received 
and  ado))ted,  '  as  containing  the  sj'stem  of  doctrine  taught  in  the 
Holy  Scriptures,'  it  being  understood  that  this  Confession  is 
received  in  its  proi)er  historical,  that  is,  the  Calvinistic  or  Re- 
formed sense;  it  is  also  understood  that  various  methods  of  view- 


INTRODUCTION.  9 

ing,  stating,  explaining,  and  illustrating  the  doctrines  of  tlie 
Confession,  whicti  do  not  impair  the  integritj'  of  the  Refoinied 
or  Calvinistic  sj'stem,  are  to  be  freely  allowed  in  the  united 
Churcli,  as  they  have  hitherto  been  allowed  in  the  separate 
churches;  and^ie  "(Jovernnient  and  Discipline  of  the  PresBy- 
terian  Church  in  the  United  States  shall  be  approved  as  contain- 
ing the  principles  and  rule  of  our  polity." 

The  reader  will  find,  upon  comparing  this  with  the  doctrinal 
basis  of  1867,  that  it  is  precisely  the  same  thing,  couched  in  dif- 
ferent phrases ;  this  being,  if  possible,  more  precise  and  un- 
equivocal in  repudiating  the  Old  School,  and  adopting  the  New 
School, principles  and  phraseology.  The  basis  of  1867,  conforms 
to  the  platform  of  Mr.  Barnes'  "Defence,"  as  we  have  already 
seen.  That  of  1868,  covers  the  same  ground,  but  is  conformed, 
rather,  to  the  position  of  the  New  Haven  professors,  as  set  forth 
in  their  "  Statement"  on  the  subject.* 

On  the  disposition  of  the  Seminaries  and  Boards,  the  new 
terms  corresponded  with  those  of  the  preceding  year.  Respect- 
ing the  publications  of  the  two  churches,  it  was  referred  to  the 
Board  of  Publication  of  the  united  Church,  to  revise  them,  "and 
perfect  a  catalogue  for  the  joint  Church,  so  as  to  exclude  invidi- 
ous references  to  the  past. ' ' 

As  to  the  examination  of  intrant  ministers,  there  is  a  seeming 
improvement,  by  which,  however,  nothing  is  gained  to  the  cause 
of  sound  doctrine. 

"10.  It  is  agreed  that  the  Presbyteries  possess  the  right  to 
examine  ministers  api)lying  for  admission  from  other  Presby- 
teries ;  but  each  Presbytery  shall  be  left  free  to  decide  for  itself 
when  it  shall  exercise  the  right.  ' 

"11.  It  shall  be  regarded  as  the  duty  of  all  our  judicatories, 
ministers,  and  people,  in  the  united  Church,  to  study  the  things 
which  make  for  peace,  and  to  guard  against  all  needless  and 
offensive  references  to  the  causes  that  have  divided  us ;  and,  in 
order  to  avoid  the  revival  of  past  issues,  by  the  continuance  of 
any  usage  in  either  branch  of  the  ChuVch  that  has  grown  out  of 
our  former  conflicts,  it  is  earnestly  recommended  to  the  lower 

*  See  below,  p.  209. 


10  INTRODUCTION. 

judicatories  of  the  Church,  that  they  conform  their  practice  in 
lelation  to  all  such  usages,  as  far  as  is  consistent  with  their  con- 
victions of  duty,  to  the  general  custom  of  the  Church  prior  to 
the  controversies  that  resulted  in  the  separation." 

Of  no  value,  for  the  maintenance  of  the  doctrinal  purity  of 
the  ministry,  will  be  the  abstract  right,  thus  acknowledged  in  the 
Presbyteries;  a  i-ight  thus  expressly  rempved  from  the  category 
of  duties,  and  from  the  right  of  supervision  and  enforcement  by 
the  higher  courts ;  whilst  it  is  stigmatized  with  odium,  by  this 
fundamental  law  of  the  Church,  and  discountenanced,  as  in  such 
circumstances,  it  would  be,  by  the  common  custom  of  the  Church. 
The  basis  of  18G7  recommended  the  Presbyteries  to  waive  their 
prerogative.  That  of  1868,  deprives  the  Assembly  of  all  power 
over  the  subject. 

The  true  character  of  the  doctrinal  basis,  was  promptly  recog- 
nized and  hailed  by  the  New  School  Assembly.  It  was  referred 
to  a  committee  of  which  the  Rev.  Dr.  Hickok  was  chairman. 
Of  the  doctrinal  terms,  this  committee  reported,  and  the  Assem- 
bly adopted,  the  following  exposition. 

''  'Various  methods  of  viewing,  stating,  explaining,  and  illus- 
trating' the  doctrines  of  the  Confession  of  Faith  are  to  be  freely 
allowed  in  the  united  Church, as  they  have  hitherto  been  allowed 
in  the  separate  Churches,  only  they  must  not  impair  the  integrity 
of  the  Calvinistic  system.  And  now  who  shall  decide  whether 
the  views  do  impair  the  integrity  of  the  system  ?  If  there  be  a 
strenuous  and  rigid  umpire,  such  will  doubtless  be  found  intol- 
erant of  opinions  and  interpretations  contrary  to  its  own.  A 
mind  cautious  and  jealous  of  all  encroachment  on  religious 
liberty  will  doubt,  and  in  proportion  to  his  fears  he  will  hesitate 
or  object. 

"  But  is  the  danger  here  really  formidable?  Admit  the  ma- 
jority of  the  ecclesiastical  body  must  decide  ;  but  in  the  way  the 
members  of  our  Presbyteries  now  will  have  their  standing  in  the 
united  Church,  then,  will  they  be  unsafe  and  exposed  to  oppres- 
sion? x\side  from  the  manifest  liberality  and  confidence  and 
love  which  there  must  be  in  the  members  of  the  opposite  branch, 
before  three-quarters  of  its  Presbyteries  shall  vote  us  together, 
there  are  three  quite  impregnable  safeguards.     The  man  who^e 


INTRODUCTION.  11 

sentiments  do  not  violate  the  Calvinistic  system  cannot  be  hurt. 
And  if  the  fear  still  is,  that  in  the  opinion  of  the  judicatory,  the 
sentiment  may  be  in  violation  of  the  integrity  of  the  Calvinistic 
system,  and  that  the  opinionof  the  judicatory  must  rule,  the  answer 
at  once  is,  not  the  judicatory  on  its  own  opinion,  but  the  judica- 
tory as  convinced  that  the  opposite  branch  of  the  Church  has 
allowed  or  not  allowed  the  sentiment  to  be  in  consonance  with 
the  Calvinistic  system.  If  the  man  is  not  out  of  the  pale  of  his 
former  Church's  orthodoxy,  he  cannot  be  in  danger  from  any 
ecclesiastical  court's  rigidity  or  bigotry.  Danger  from  this  can- 
not be  further  pressed  without  directly  questioning  the  candor 
and  honesty  of  the  judicatory,  and  then  we  are  at  once  beyond 
all  Christian  redress  or  regulation." 

After  the  adjournment  of  the  Assemblies,  the  Rev.  George 
Hill  met  with  Dr.  Hickok,  and  conversed  with  him  on  this  sub- 
ject. "In  that  conversation,"  says  Mr.  Hill,  "he  (Dr. 
Hickok)  said  '  as  they  (the  New  School)  regarded  the  basis  as 
binding  them  to  tolerate  the  Old  School  doctrine  of  immediate 
imputation,  so  they  regarded  it  as  binding  us  to  tolerate — well 
(said  he)  to  give  it  a  definite  form — Taylorism.'  He  farther 
said  that  '  it  was  the  belief  that  the  basis  bound  us  to  tolerate 
everything  that  they  had  tolerated;  that  finally  reconciled  many 
of  the  members  of  the  New  School  Assembly  to  vote  for  the 
basis,  notwithstanding  their  opposition  to  the  tenth  Article.'  I 
expressed  to  him  the  conviction  that  the  present  basis  is  more 
latitudinarian  than  the  one  of  last  year,  and  he  answered  that 
'he  so  regarded  it,  and  was  surprised — not  grieved,  but  sur- 
prised— that  the  Old  School  committee  consented  to  it.'  " 

The  attention  of  Dr.  Hickok  was  called  to  Mr.  Hill's  state- 
ment, by  a  member  of  the  committee  on  reunion.  He  replied, 
that  he  remembers  the  conversation  referred  to,  but  does  not 
remember  the  remark  respecting  Taylorism.  He  does  not,  how- 
ever, pretend  to  deny  it ;  but  proceeds  to  reiterate  an  equivalent 
statement. 

"I  am  willing  to  stand  pubhcly  responsible  for  the  opinion, 
that  the  said  first  Article  will  bind  the  united  Church  to  tolerate 
such  doctrines  and  explanations  as  have  been  allowed  as  orthodox 
by  either   branch,   and   that  any   particular   Presbytery,   must 


12  INTRODUCTION. 

judge  not  merely  from  its  own  opinion  of  the  orthodoxy  of  the 
same,  but  in  view  of  what  has  been  allowed  by  either  one  or  the 
other  of  the  separate  branches.  I  do  not  choose  to  say  of  any 
doubtful,  specific  doctrine  or  explanation,  whether  it  has  or  has 
not  been  so  allowed  by  either  branch.  Certainly  I  should  not 
wish  to  be  understood  as  saying  that  '  Tajdorism  '  in  any  '  defi- 
nite form  '  had  been  so  allowed." 

Nor,  we  suppose,  would  Dr.  Hickok  deny  it.  It  is,  however,  clear 
in  what  sense  the  New  School  Assembly  and  Church  understands 
and  accepts  the  basis  of  reunion ;  and  it  is  certain  that  their  under- 
standing is  fully  sustained  by  a  strict  interpretation  of  the  lan- 
guage of  the  paper,  and  confirmed  by  reference  to  the  history  of 
the  question,  both  in  the  old  time  of  the  controversy,  and  in  the 
discussions  of  the  joint  committee. 

This  report,  moreover,  of  Dr.  Hickok,  was,  upon  motion  of 
Dr.  E.  J.  Breckinridge,  formally  read  in  our  Assembly,  after 
which,  the  Assembly  proceeded  to  adopt  the  plan  of  union, — 
rejecting  and  laying  on  the  table,  every  proposition  which  looked 
toward  repudiating  or  guarding  against  the  sense  thus  put 
upon  it. 

So  far,  the  majority  of  the  Assembly  had,  manifestly,  accepted 
and  committed  itself  to  the  "New  School  understanding  of  the 
basis.  Knowing,  officially,  the  sense  in  which  the  covenant  was 
understood  by  the  other  party,  and  accepting  the  terms  thus 
interpreted,  to  the  express  exclusion  of  all  cautionary  or  explan- 
atory amendment,  they  were  bound  alike  in  law  and  morals  by 
the  sense  thus  acquiesced  in. 

After  the  adoption  of  the  doctrinal  basis.  Dr.  Monfort  moved 
that  ' '  while  the  Assembly  has  approved  of  the  Report  of  the 
joint  committee  on  reunion,  it  expresses  its  preference  for  a 
change  in  the  first  item  on  the  basis,  leaving  out  the  following 
words,  viz.  : — 

'  It  being  understood,  that  this  Confession  is  received  in  its 
proper,  historical,  that  is,  the  Calvinistic  or  Reformed  sense ; 
it  is  also  imderstood,  that  various  methods  of  viewing,  stating, 
explaining  and  illustrating  the  doctrines  of  the  Confession,  which 
do  not  impair  the  integrity  of  the  Reformed  or  Calvinistic  sj^s- 
tcm,  are  to  be  freely  allowed  in  the  united  Church,  as  they  have 


INTRODUCTION.  13 

hitherto  heen  allowed  in  the  separate  Churches.'  The  Assemblj' 
believe  that  by  leaving  out  these  clauses,  the  basis  will  be  more 
simple,  and  more  expressive  of  mutual  confidence." 

The  real  nature  and  effect  of  this  overture  for  amendment  will 
appear  in  view  of  the  reasons  which  made  it  so  acceptable  to 
the  New  School,  who  had  been  so  firm  in  insisting  upon  li})erty 
as  to  doctrine.  These  are  apparent.  Before  the  adoption  of 
the  basis  of  union  the  Rev.  Dr.  Eagleson  had  moved  to  amend 
it  by  striking  out  the  above-cited  clause.  Had  that  motion 
carried,  it  would  have  been  recognized  as  a  rejection  of  the 
latitudinarian  principles  of  the  basis.  And  had  the  members  of 
the  xlssembly  generally  understood  the  precise  eiFect  of  the 
course  taken,  they  would,  no  doubt,  have  thus  acted ;  for  it  is 
not  supposable  that  a  majority  of  the  members  designed  to 
sanction  the  principles  contained  in  the  "  Grurley  basis;" 
as  the  result  most  signally  proved.  Probably,  the  leading 
managers  of  the  bu^ness  understood  precisely  what  they  were 
doing. 

After  the  committee's  basis  had  been  adopted,  in  response  to 
the  action  of  the  New  School  Assembly,  and  with  the  distinct 
and  official  view  to  the  tenor  of  that  action,  the  proposed  amend- 
ment, couched  in  the  terms  in  lohichnt  was  /rained,  and  enforced 
by  the  arguments  lahich  accompanied  it,  was  so  far  from  correct- 
ing the  false  principles  of  the  basis,  that  it  constituted  a  most 
efi'ectual  recognition  and  confirmation  of  them.  It  was  proposed 
to  the  New  School  Assembly,  as  an  alternative,  at  their  option, 
to  the  committee's  basis.  No  intimation  was  given,  or  implied, 
of  dissatisfaction  with  the  principles  of  the  basis,  nor  with  the  New 
School  interpretation  of  it.  On  the  contrary,  the  reason,  the  only 
reason,  stated  in  the  proposition  itself,  for  the  change,  is  that  it 
will  render  the  basis  ' '  more  simple  and  i/nore  expressive  of 
mutual  confidence.'"  And  when  the  commissioners  from  the 
Assembly  laid  the  amendment  before  the  Harrisburgh  Assembly, 
they  were  careful  to  state  that  this  proposal  originated  with 
"  the  friends  of  reunion,''  that  they  were  perfectly  satisfied  with 
the  basis  as  it  was,  and  only  suggested  this  amendment,  as  being 
expressive  of  greater  mutual  confidence,  and  likely  to  strengthen 
the  overture  in  the  Presbyteries.  Upon  this  ground  they  threw 
2 


14  INTRODUCTION. 

themselves  upon  the  magnanimity  of  our  New  School  brethren, 
pleading  "in  earnest  appeals  to  the  Assembly  to  aid  them  in  the 
coming  struggle."''^  When  it  is  considered,  that  there  was  no 
party  in  the  Assembly,  nor  in  the  Church,  opposed  to  reunion, 
provided  the  fundamental  principles  distinctive  of  our  Church 
are  protected, — it  is  evident  what  meaning  the  New  School  were 
expected  to  attach  to  the  phrase,  "friends  of  reunion,"  and  in 
"wliat  sense  they  were  to  understand  the  proposed  amendment,  as 
coming  from  those  "  friends,"  rather  than  from  others. 

The  New  School  Assembly,  thus  appealed  to,  was  ready,  by  a 
large  majority,  to  have  accepted  the  proffered  amendment ;  but 
was  precluded  by  the  fact  that  so  many  members  had  left,  that 
there  were  not  enough  remaining  to  justify  an  orderly  recon- 
sideration. 

In  the  mean  time,  the  members  of  our  Assembly  would  seem 
to  have  been  awakening  to  a  just  sense  of  the  position,  into 
which,  by  eminentl}^  skillful  management^  they  had  been  led, 
and  the  attitude  in  which  these  transactions  had  placed  the 
Assembly  and  the  Church.  Reflection  on  the  impressive  argu- 
ments of  Hodge  and  Breckinridge,  Backus,  Humphrey,  Woods 
and  others,  could  not  fail  of  inducing  conviction  in  many  minds. 
The  unanswerable  arguments  of  the  protest  of  the  minority 
were  about  to  be  spread  on  the  records  and  go  forth  to  the  Church, 
with  names  affixed,  which  have  always  and  most  justly  com- 
manded the  aff'ectionate  reverence,  not  of  our  Church  only,  but 
of  the  whole  Church  of  God. 

It  was  when  this  protest  was  about  to  be  read,  that  I)r.  Hall 
rose,  and  proposed  to  offer  a  resolution  which  would  obviate  the 
necessity  for  the  protest.  The  resolution  was  unanimously 
adopted,  as  follows :  — 

^^  Resolved,  That  this  Assembly  desires  it  to  be  understood 
that  the  first  Article  of  the  report  of  the  joint  reunion  Com- 
mittee, which  is  the  doctrinal  basis  of  union,  and  which  was 
adopted  on  Friday  last  by  this  Assembly,  is  not  to  be  interpreted 
as  giving  license  to  the  propagation  of  doctrines  which  have  been 
condemned  by  either  Assembly,  nor  to  permit  any  Presbytery  in 

♦Harrisburgh  correspondent  of  the  Pittsburgh  Banner,  June  10,  1868. 


INTRODUCTION.  15 

the  united  Church  to  license  or  ordain  to  the  work  of  the  min- 
istry anj^  candidate  who  maintains  any  form  of  doctrine  con- 
demned b}^  either  Assembly." 

This  resolution  was  substantially  the  same  as  an  amendment 
which  Dr.  Humphrey  had  proposed,  pending  the  motion  to 
adopt  the  first  Article.  But,  as  now  adopted,  the  resolution,  as 
Dr.  Humphrey  justly  remarked,  was  "  no  part  of  the  terms  sent 
to  the  New  School  Assembly ;  and,  hence,  does  not  meet  the 
case,  nor  obviate  the  necessity  for  the  protest,  which  I  now 
offer." 

After  the  protest  had  been  read,  the  Rev.  Dr.  J.  C.  Backus  moved 
to  send  by  telegraph  to  the  Assembly  at  Harrisburgh,  a  copy  of  the 
paper  of  Dr.  Hall,  just  passed  by  the  Assembly.  There  was  a 
cry  of  "  No  !  no  !"  and  a  motion  made  to  lay  the  proposition  on 
the  table.  This  motion  was  lost,  and  the  resolution  of  Dr. 
Backus  was  adopted.  Of  the  reception  of  this  communication, 
by  the  New  School  Assembly,  the  Harrisburg  correspondent  of 
the  Pittsburgh  Banner  gives  this  account : — 

"Just  before  the  final  adjournment  a  despatch  was  received 
from  Albany,  announcing  the  passage  of  a  resolution  by  the  Old 
School  Assembly  as  to  the  construction  of  the  first  Article  of  the 
basis,  which,  at  first,  created  quite  a  sensation.  Upon  reflection, 
however,  it  was  supposed  that  its  object  was  to  conciliate  the 
minority;  and  that  as  it  was  proposed  by  a  friend  of  reunion, 
and  unanimously  adopted,  it  meant  nothing  vei-y  serious.  I  do 
not  wonder  that  it  aroused  suspicion  ;  and  with  my  present  hght 
upon  the  subject  I  cannot  but  regard  its  adoption  as  entirely 
superfluous." 

The  italics  were  made  by  the  correspondent  himself  The  in- 
timation conveyed  by  the  whole  statement  is  so  ofl'ensive.  that  it 
would  be  justly  regarded  as  grossly  slanderous,  had  it  proceeded 
from  any  other  than  a  "friend  of  reunion."  It  seems  that  the 
action  of  our  Assembly  "  aroused  suspicion  "  in  the  minds  of  our 
New  School  brethren,  who,  at  first,  apprehended  that  the 
Assembly  really  meant  what  the  Hall  resolution  said.  But  this 
unpleasant  impression  was  obviated,  by  the  consideration  that 
the  proposition  came  from  a  "friend  of  reunion,"  to  whom  it 
seems  is  conceded  the  privilege  of  saying  the  most  serious  things 


16  INTRODUCTION. 

"  to  conciliate  the  minorit}^"  without  meaning  anything  serious 
thereby. 

The  idea  tliat  such  was  the  design  of  our  Assembly,  is  not  to  be 
tolerated  for  a  moment ;  and  it  is  to  be  hoped  that  the  action 
of  our  Presbyteries  will  be  such,  as  will  cause  all  men  to  under- 
stand that  they  do  seriously  mean  to  be  faithful  to  that  testimony 
which  God  has  committed  to  our  beloved  Church ;  and  it  be- 
comes them  to  ponder  the  fact  that  the  adoption  of  the  proposed 
basis  of  union  would  place  us  in  a  position  of  doctrinal  defection 
unspeakably  worse  than  was  ever  imputed  to  the  New  School. 
Whatever  else  may  be  chargeable  against  them,  they  have  never 
entered  into  a  formal  contract  to  grant  harbor  and  protection  to 
heresy.  However  lax  may  have  been  their  views  and  practice 
on  the  subject,  they  have  retained  the  matter  under  the  control 
of  their  own  consciences,  reserving  the  right  of  acting  upon  each 
case  on  its  own  merits,  as  it  arose.  -  To  us  it  is  now  proposed  to 
enter  into  a  solemn  covenant,  which  will  be  paramount  to  the 
Constitution  itself,  to  tolerate  and  protect  all  such  "  explana- 
tions" and  teachings  as  our  New  School  brethren  have  been 
accustomed  to  permit.  How  much  this  means,  no  man  on  earth 
can  tell.  That  it  does  include  the  teachings  of  Messrs.  Barnes 
and  Beman,  and  Finney  and  Taylor,  we  do  know.  History 
records  it,  and  the  Presbytery  of  Tioga  attests  it.  But  what  else 
may  prove,  upon  investigation,  to  have  found  shelter  under  the 
broad  regis  of  New  School  toleration,  the  future  onl}^  can  discover. 

It  will  be  said,  as  it  was  upon  the  floor  of  the  Assembly,  that 
every  New  School  member  of  the  committee  of  reunion  repudi- 
ated the  position  taken  by  that  Presbytery.  But  that  fact  has 
no  bearing,  whatever,  on  the  issue.  As  we  have  seen,  the  doc- 
trinal basis,  as  justly  interpreted "  by  Dr.  Hickok  and  the  New 
School  Assembly,  entitles  any  sentiments  to  impunity,  which  have 
been  heretofore'  tolerated  in  either  Church.  The  members  of  the 
New  School  committee  may  not  like  it ;  but  the  fxct  is,  that  the 
Presbytery  of  Tioga  had  openly  taken  its  position  on  this  sub- 
ject, before  the  adoption  of  this  basis,  unrebuked  by  any  com- 
petent authority  in  the  body.  Its  dictum,  therefore,  constitutes 
a  precedent,  in  the  contemplation  of  the  Gurley  basis,  to  which 
any  impleaded  Pelagian  will  be  entitled  to  appeal,  in  his  vindica- 


INTRODUCTION.  17 

tion,  if  the  basis  is  adopted  ;  and  it  is  scarcely  necessary  to  say, 
that,  if  the  Tioga  Presbytery  has  been  the  only  one  to  avow  this 
position,  pending  these  negotiations,  it  is  not  the  only  one  which 

• 

has  practically  occupied  it.  The  Taylorism  of  Mr.  Finney 
never  prevented  his  being  a  cherishecFmember  of  the  New 
School  party ;  and  it  was  not  until  his  withdrawal  from  the  Church 
and  embrace  of  perfectionism,  the  logical  sequence  of  his  previ- 
ous sentiments,  that  he  ceased  to  be  recognized  by  them,  as  en- 
titled to  all  confidence  and  respect.  The  avowed  Pelagianism  of 
the  Rev.  Dr.  Edward  Beecher,  and  Professors  Sturdevant  and 
Kirby,  received  judicial  sanction  from  th^e  Presbytery  of  Illinois,* 
and  Dr.  Beman  and  Mr.  Barnes,  with  many  others  of  like  senti- 
ments, are,  to  this  day,  cherished  ministers  of  the  New  School 
Church.  Their  sentiments^itThas  a  perfect  and  unquestionable 
right  to  sanction,  in  all  honesty.  But  the  Old  School  must 
abandon  the  principles  for  which  our  Church  has  always  con- 
tended, before  they  can  consent  to  union,  on  such  terms. 

It  is  asserted  that  our  New  School  brethren  have  changed  on 
the  doctrinal  question.  The  only  question  that  has  ever  divided 
us,  on  that  subject  has  been  the  propriety  of  tolerating  and 
shielding  eiTor.  If,  on  that  subject,  they  have  changed,  what 
means  the  interpretation,  given  by  Dr.  Hickok  and  adopted  by 
their  Assembly,  to  the  basis  of  union.  What  mean  the  gratula- 
tions  of  the  Moderator,  Dr.  Stearns,  a  member  of  the  reunion 
committee,  that  "under  this  basis,  with  its  conceded  rights  of 
stating,  explaining  and  illustrating  doctrine,  Albert  Barnes 
never  could  have  been  tried  for  heresy."  What  meant  the  Bev. 
Dr.  H.  B.  Smith,  another  member  of  the  committee,  in  urging 
that  according  to  the  basis,  neither  branch  of  the  Church  had  a 
right  to  say  that  its  own  interpretation  was  the  only  correct 
one;  "and  that  if  he  supposed  that  the  basis  would  pre- 
vent free  inquiry  or  new  views  of  the  Bible  and  the  Confes- 
sion, he  should  not  vote  for  that  basis.  Liberty  was  the  very  hfe 
of  the  Church.  It  should  not  be  bound  finally  to  any  particular 
interpretation." 

In  fact,  it  seems  that  even  the  "  Hall  resolution"  is  found  sus- 

*  See  below,  p.  472. 
2* 


\> 


18  INTRODUCTION. 

ceptible  of  an  interpretation,  in  consonance  with  this  principle 
of  liberty.     So,  it  appears  to  be  explained  by  Dr.  Hall,  himself; 

« 

and  so,  the  author  has  been  informed  by  a  very  excellent  New 
School  brother,  he  understands  it, — as  perfectly  consistent  with 
the  honorable  recognition  of  Messrs.  Barnes  and  Beman,  in  the 
united  Church. 

Whatever  else,  however,  may  be  ambiguous,  the  negotiations 
so  far,  have  made  it  clear  that  the  errors  against  which  the 
Old  School  testimonies  were  addressed  are  still  cherished  in  the 
bosom  of  the  New  School  Church ;  and  that  that  body  is  as 
determined  as  it  was  in  1837,  in  claiming  for  those  errors  un- 
molested status. 

The  whole  matter  is  thus  reduced  to  a  very  simple  issue. 
There  is  a  fundamental  and  irreconcilable  difference  of  principle 
between  the  two  bodies,  on  this  subject  of  liberty  of  doctrinal 
divergence  from  the  standards.  The  question  for  the  Old  School 
to  determine  is,  whether  we  are  prepared  to  ignore  all  the  past, 
surrender  the  principles  on  which  our  Church  has  heretofore 
stood,  furl  up  the  banner  of  testimony  which  she  has  borne, 
and  enter  into  covenant  to  abandon  the  precious  doctrines  of 
grace  to  the  mercy  of  every  theological  empiric  who  may  fancy 
that  his  "  free  inquiries"  have  found  a  new  and  better  way. 


HISTORY  OF  THE  NEW  SCHOOL 


CHAPTER   I. 

•THE    ENGLISH    HEADS    OF    AGREEMENT. 

Presbyterianism  was  nevei'  organized  in  England — Nominal  Presby- 
terians in  1688 — Union  of  1690 — Its  origin — The  Heads  of  Agree- 
ment—  The  resulting  system  —  Baxter's  Neonomian  scheme — 
Mather's  estimate  of  it— The  Pinners'  Hall  controversy — False 
moderation — Doctrinal  teaching  decried — Laxity  of  subscription — • 
Bourn's  Catechisms — Arian  defection — Mainly  among  the  Pres- 
byterians— The  origin  and  end  of  the  development — Appeals  of 
Congregationalists  and  the  New  School  to  this  history. 

The  standards  of  Westminster  were  tlie  products 
of  the  piety,  learning  and  researches  of  English 
divines.  But  the  authors  were  never  privileged  to 
witness  the  action  of  the  system  in  their  own  churches. 
The  Long  Parliament  did,  indeed,  enact  a  polity  which 
purported  to  be  based  on  that  of  the  Assembly.  But 
the  whole  system  was  so  modified  as  to  be  altogether 
subservient  to  the  designs  and  subordinate  to  the  power 
of  Parliament,  to  which,  in  all  cases,  the  ultimate  de- 
cision of  ecclesiastical  questions  was  reserved.  Thus 
were   the   divines    of   Westminster  thwarted   in   their 

19 


20  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

labors,  and  the  prelatic  historian,  Echarcl,  scornfully  but 
truly  says,  that  "the  Presbyterians  never  saw  their 
dear  Presbytery  settled  in  any  one  part  of  England." 
Even  the  Parliamentary  system  was  not  brought  into 
general  operation.  It  was  altogether  unacceptable  to 
the  Presbyterians,  opposed  by  the  Independents,  and 
unsatisfactory  even  to  the  Parliament  itself,  in  which 
the  Independents  were  gaining  the  ascendancy.  At 
length,  Cromwell  seized  the  reins,  and  the  Parliament- 
ary discipline  at  once  fell  into  disuse. 

In  some  instances  the  Presbyterian  ministers  volun- 
tarily united  themselves  in  organizations  formed  after 
the  scriptural  model.  But  they  were  under  the  frown 
of  Cromwell,  and  upon  his  death  became  the  objects 
of  the  most  unrelenting  persecutions  of  the  restored 
house  of  Stuart.  In  1688  the  tyranny  and  misrule 
of  that  family  came  to  an  end.  The  exhausted  patience 
of  England  drove  James  the  Second  from  the  throne, 
and  the  nation  threw  itself  into  the  arms  of  the  illus- 
trious William  of  Orange,  a  Presbyterian  prince.  With 
him  came  respite  from  persecution,  and,  after  long  de- 
lay by  a  reluctant  Parliament,  the  Act  of  Toleration. 
Now,  at  lengtli,  miglit  have  been  realized  the  hopes  so 
long  deferred — the  development,  on  the  soil  of  England 
of  the  polity  so  fitly  framed  by  the  wisdom  of  Eng- 
land's best  divines.  But  the  nominal  Presbyterians, 
who  hailed  the  accession  of  William  to  the  throne, 
were  not  the  same  who  nearly  half  a  century  before 
had  met  in  Westminster  and  composed  those  formula- 
ries. A  new  generation  had  arisen,  which  had  been 
cradled  in  tlie  licentious  reign  of  Charles  the  Second, 
and   surrounded   by  influences  every  way  unfavorable 


THE    ENGLISH    HEADS    OF    AGREEMENT.  21 

to   the    maintenance  and  transmission  of  sound  prin- 
ciples. 

It  was^  in  fact,  scarcely  possible  that  the  men  of 
1688  should  have  felt  any  peculiar  interest  in  the  dis- 
tinctive ])rinciples  of  Presbyterian  church  government, 
or  possessed  any  intelligent  acquaintance  with  them. 
In  this  respect  they  were  at  a  disadvantage  which  was 
not  shared  by  their  brethren,  the  Independents.  The 
Presbyterian  system  involved  features  requiring  ex- 
tended co-operation,  which  implies  more  or  less  pub- 
licity and  consequent  exposure  to  the  agents  of  pei^se- 
cution.  But  the  other,  offspring  of  a  bloody  period,  is 
pre-eminently  fitted  for  jDcrpetuation  at  such  a  time ; 
for,  wherever  a  little  company  of  believers  is  associated 
for  worship),  it  is  complete  in  itself  for  all  the  purposes 
of  their  system.  The  Independents,  therefore,  emerged 
from  the  dark  period  which  preceded  the  revolution 
of  16.S8  fully  organized,  familiar  with  the  practical 
working  of  their  system,  and  prizing  it  the  more  for 
all  they  had  endured  on  its  account,  and  for  the  bless- 
ings they  had  experienced  in  the  stolen  enjoyment  of 
its  ordinances. 

The  Presbyterians  were  in  altogether  different  cir- 
cumstances. During  forty  years  of  oppression  and 
persecution  they  had  been  entire  strangers  to  the  prac- 
tical operation  of  the  Reformed  polity,  and  it  was  im- 
possible in  their  situation  that  they  should  have  studied 
with  any  diligence,  or  cherished  with  strong  attach- 
ment, the  theory  of  a  system  so  utterly  impracticable 
to  them.  On  the  other  hand,  they  were  thoroughly 
habituated  to  a  system  which  the  pressure  of  their  cir- 
cumstances had  moulded  into  essential  agreement  with 


22  HISTORY    OF    THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

that  of  the  Independents.  They  felt  an  aflPectionate 
regard  for  that  })arty  whieh  had  so  long  shared  with 
them  the  anxieties  and  scourge  of  persecution,  and  they 
were  trained  to  the  habit  of  compromise  with  regard  to 
principles  of  order  under  the  pressure  of  necessity — a 
habit  easily  degenerating  into  a  readiness  to  yield  them 
to  considerations  of  expediency  or  convenience. 

When  to  the  circumstances  already  indicated  we  add 
that  new  doctrines  of  seeming  innocence,  but  really 
pregnant  with  apostasy,  were  cherished  by  leading 
Presbyterians  and  gaining  strength  in  the  party,  we 
need  look  no  further  to  find  causes  abundantly  adequate 
to  account  for  the  fact  that  a  less  stringent  order  of 
discipline  was  preferred  to  that  of  Westminster — that 
when  the  prize  was  just  within  their  grasp  these  sons 
of  an  illustrious  ancestry  should  reject  it,  and  sell  their 
birthright  for  a  mess  of  pottage.  The  Union  of  1690, 
though  devised  and  executed  by  eminent  and  honored 
servants  of  Christ,  was  unwise  in  its  conception,  and, 
as  demonstrated  by  the  result,  was  consummated  under 
the  frown  of  the  Head  of  the  Cliurch.  For  its  origin 
we  must  look  to  the  churches  of  New  England. 

Although  a  majority  of  the  early  population  of  the 
New  England  colonies  were  Independents,  still  many 
of  the  ministers  and  people  who  sought  refuge  there 
from  the  persecutions  of  England  were,  by  conviction 
and  preference,  Presbyterians.  Such  was  Wilson,  one 
of  the  first  pastors  of  Boston.  Such  was  Hooker,  the 
pioneer  of  Connecticut,  "  the  light  of  the  Western 
churches ;"  and  Elliot,  the  apostle  of  the  Indians. 
The  Governor  and  Council  of  Connecticut,  in  168'0,  in 
reply  to  a  series  of  questions  proposed  to  them  by  the 


THE   E^^GLISH    HEADS   OF    AGREEMENT.  28 

Lords  of  Trade  and  Plantations  in  regard  to  the  charac- 
ter of  the  popnlation,  etc.,  state  that  ^^  some  are  strict 
Congregational  men,  others  more  large  Congregational 
men,  and  some  moderate  Presbyterians.  And,  take  the 
Congregationalists  of  both  sorts,  they  are  the  greater 
part  of  the  people  in  the  colony.""'  Such  was  the 
composition  of  the  most  of  the  Northern  colonies.  The 
commingling  of  these  elements  induced  frequent  de- 
bates and  uneasiness,  and  gave  occasion  to  the  repeated 
assembling  of  councils  and  synods,  by  which  schemes 
of  discipline  were  constructed  and  plans  of  comprehen- 
sion devised,  varying  from  the  Erastian  Congregation- 
alism of  the  Cambridge  platform  to  the  almost  Pres- 
byterian order  of  that  of  Saybrook.  Thus,  upon  a  t 
vaguely-defined  and  varying  basis,  by  the  union  of  In- 
dependents and  Presbyterians,  were  the  Congregational 
churches  of  New  England  created. 

The  example  thus  exhibited  in  the  colonies  sug- 
gested frequent  movements  toward  a  similar  union  in 
the  mother  country.  Baxter  gives  an  account  of  three 
several  schemes  of  this  sort  in  which  he  was  engaged, 
all  of  which  failed.f 

Shortly  before  the  accession  of  William  and  Mary, 
the  Rev.  Increase  Mather,  being  at  the  time  Presidei  t 
of  Harvard  College,  was  sent  to  England,  and  re- 
mained there  several  years  on  business  of  the  province 
and  college.  Whilst  there,  he  set  himself  with  great 
zeal  to  bring  about  sucji  a  union  in  the  mother  country 
as  had  long  been  familiar  to  him  in  the  New  England 
colonies.     His  proposals  were  seconded  by  Bates,  Howe, 

*  Hinman's  Antiquities  of  Connecticut,  p.  141. 
f  Orme's  Life  of  Baxter,  vol.  i.,  p.  577. 


24  HISTOEY   OF   THE    NEW    SCHOOL. 

Baxter  and  others.  The  result  was,  that  in  1690*  the 
ministers  of  the  three  denominations  in  London — the* 
Presbyterians,  Inde23endents  and  Baptists — entered  into 
articles  of  union  with  each  other.  These  articles,  or,  as 
they  were  entitled,  ""  Heads  of  Agreement,'^  constituted 
a  final  and  entire  surrender  of  Presbyterian  principles 
by  the  ministers  of  that  name.  The  example  of  Lon- 
don was  speedily  imitated  tln^oughout  the  kingdom. 

The  author  of  Magnalia  Americana,  speaking  of  the 
Heads  of  Agreement,  says,  "  The  brethren  of  the  Pres- 
byterian way  in  England  are  lately  come  into  such  an 
happy  union  with  those  of  the  Congregational  that  all 
former  names  of  distinction  are  now  swallowed  up  in 
that  blessed  one  of  '  LTnited  Brethren.'  And  now, 
partly  because  one  of  New  England,  namely,  Mr.  In- 
crease Mather,  then  resident  in  London,  was  very  sin- 
gularly instrumental  in  effecting  of  that  union,  but  more 
because  that  union  hath  been  for  many  lustres,  yea, 
many  decades  of  years,  exemplified  in  the  chui'chcs  of 
New  England,  so  far  that  I  believe  'tis  not  possible  for 
me  to  give  a  truer  description  of  our  own  ecclesiastical 
constitutionf  than  by  transcribing  thereof,  the  articles 
of  that  union  shall  be  here  repeated.''^ 

The  system  developed  in  the  articles  gives  the  Inde- 
pendent definition  of  the  particular  congregation.  It 
declares  that  "  In  the  administration  of  cliurch  power, 

*  In  some  recent  discussions  the  date  is  given  as  1691.  The  above 
is  according  to  Bogue  and  Bennet,  vol.  i.,  p.  381. 

f  The  articles  were  formally  adopted  by  the  Association  of  Connec- 
ticut in  1708  (Upham's  Ratio  Disciplinee,  p.  311),  and  are  usually 
published  along  with  the  other  traditional  standards  of  the  New  Eng- 
land churches. 

X  Magnalia  Americana,  vol.  ii.,  p.  233. 


THE   ENGLISH   PIEADS   OF   AGEEEMEXT.  25 

it  belongs  to  the  pastor  and  other  elders  of  every  par- 
ticular church,  if  such  there  be,  to  rule  and  govern, 
and  to  the  brotherhood  to  consent  according  to  the  rule 
of  the  gospel."  It  states  the  office  of  deacon  to  be  "  of 
divine  appointment,  and  that  it  belongs  to  tlieir  office 
to  receive,  lay  out  and  distribute  the  church's  stock  to 
its  proper  uses  by  the  direction  of  the  pastor  and  breth- 
ren, if  need  be.  And  whereas  divers  are  of  opinion 
that  there  is  also  the  office  of  ruling  elders,  who  labor 
not  in  word  and  doctrine,  and  others  think  otherwise ; 
we  agree  that  this  diffi^rence  make  no  breach  among  us." 
JSTo  provision  was  made  for  stated  meetings  of  church 
officers,  but  it  was  agreed,  "  1 .  That,  in  order  to  con- 
cord, and  in  other  weischtv  and  difficult  cases,  it  is  need- 
ful,  and  according  to  the  mind  of  Christ,  that  the  min- 
isters of  the  several  churches  be  consulted  and  advised 
with  about  such  matters.  2.  That  such  meetings  may 
consist  of  smaller  or  greater  numbers,  as  the  matter 
shall  require.  3.  That  particular  churches,  their  re- 
spective elders  and  members,  ought  to  have  a  reveren- 
tial regard  to  their  judgment  so  given,  and  not  dissent 
therefrom  without  apparent  grounds  from  the  word  of 
God."  But  to  preclude  any  assumption  of  authority 
in  these  councils  it  was  agreed,  "  That  none  of  our  par- 
ticular churches  shall  be  subordinate  to  one  another, 
each  being  endued  with  equality  of  power  from  Jesus 
Christ.  And  that  none  of  the  particular  churches, 
their  officer  or  officers,  shall  exercise  any  power*  or 
have  any  superiority  over  any  other  church  or  their 
officers." 

Thus,  for  no  case  that  could  arise  in  regard  to  the 
discipline  of  members  or  ministers  was  there  any  tri- 
3 


26  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

bunal  other  than  the  particular  church,  and  for  possible 
dereliction  of  churches  no  remedy  whatever  was  pro- 
vided. It  is  not  necessary  to  enter  more  into  detail  in 
^  *  order  to  demonstrate  that  by  these  articles  of  union  the 
^]h'  "  nominal  Presbyterians  of  England  definitively  abandoned 
every  feature  distinctive  of  the  Westminster  polity.  Of 
the  system  now  inaugurated  in  its  stead  we  have  some 
illustrations  in  the  observations  of  our  own  Samuel  Da- 
vies,  whose  visit  to  England  on  behalf  of  the  College 
of  New  Jersey  enabled  him  to  witness  the  operation  of 
the  system  in  its  heyday  of  success.  In  his  journal,  writ- 
ing in  London,  he  says :  "  In  the  evening  I  went  to  the 
Amsterdam  Coffee-house,  where  the  Indej^endent  minis- 
ters meet  for  friendly  conversation  and  to  consult  about 
the  affairs  of  the  churches,  for  they  have  no  other  Asso- 
ciations, as  the  Presbyterians  have  no  other  Presbyte- 
ries. Indeed,  there  seems  to  be  no  government  exer- 
cised jointly  among  either  of  them.  The  English 
■  Presbyterians  have  no  elders  nor  judicatories  of  any 
kind,  nor  seem  to  me  to  agree  but  in  very  few  particu- 
culars  with  the  Church  of  Scotland.  I  find,''  he  fur- 
ther remarks,  "the  Calvinlstic  Presbyterians,  as  well 
as  the  Baptists,  choose  to  frequent  the  Independent 
coffee-house,  rather  than  associate  with  their  Presby- 
terian brethren  of  Arminian  or  Socinian  sentiment  at 
Hamlin's."* 

In  view  of  the  state  of  these  churches  thus  devel- 
oped, we  might  leave  them,  with  the  language  of  Orme, 
the  biographer  of  Baxter,  himself  a  Congregationalist. 
Having  given  a  history  of  the  union,  he  adds,  that 
"  from  the  date  of  this  agreement  Presbyterian  ism  may 
*  Davies,  iu  Foote's  Sketches  of  Virginia,  vol.  i.,  p.  250. 


THE  ENGLISH  HEADS  OF  AGKEEMENT.     27 

be  said  to  have  existed  but  in  name  in  England."* 
But  there  are  lessons  in  the  subsequent  history  of 
these  churches  upon  which  we  shall  briefly  linger. 

We  have  mentioned  the  existence  of  incipient  heresy 
as  one  of  the  causes  which  indisposed  the  nominal 
Presbyterians  of  King  William's  time  to  organize  their 
churches  after  the  Westminster  model.  Arminianism 
had  for  a  half  century  been  dominant  in  the  Established 
Church,  and  was  also  gradually  infecting  the  churches 
of  the  Continent.  Richard  Baxter,  a  man  eminent 
among  the  Presbyterians,  alike  for  his  talents  and  piety, 
for  his  invaluable  practical  writings,  and  for  his  sufter- 
ings  under  the  persecutions  of  the  Second  James,  had 
attempted  to  open  a  "  middle  way"  between  the  harsh- 
ness of  the  Reformed  theology  and  the  laxity  of 
Arminius.  The  following,  from  Mather's  Magnalia 
Americana,  not  only  exhibits  some  of  the  leading  fea- 
tures of  the  new  system,  but  also  the  esteem  in  which 
it  was  held  by  the  fathers  of  New  England :  "  As  in 
those  elder  days  of  New  England  the  esteem  which  our 
churches  had  for  that  eminent  man  (Mr.  Baxter)  did 
not  hinder  them  from  rejecting  that  new  covenant  of 
works,  with  which  they  thought  he  confounded  that 
most  important  article,  upon  the  notions  whereof  the 
Church  either  stands  or  falls  ;  thus  it  is  a  grief  of  mind 
unto  our  churches  at  this  day  to  find  that  great  and 
good  man,  in  some  of  his  last  works,  under  the  blind- 
ing heat  of  his  indignation  against  some  which  we  also 
account  unjustifiable,  yea,  dangerous  opinions  and  ex- 
pressions, of  Dr.  Crisp,  reproaching  some  of  the  most 
undoubted  points  of  our  common  faith.  AYe  read  him 
*  Orme's  Life  of  Baxter,  vol.  ii.,  p.  350. 


28  HISTORY   OF    THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

unaccountably  enumerating  among  errors,  which  he  says 
have  corrupted  Christianity  and  subverted  the  Gospel, 
such  things  as  these  : 

'^ '  They  feign  that  God  made  a  covenant  with  Adam, 
that  if  he  stood  God  would  continue  him  and  his  pos- 
terity, and  if  he  fell  God  would  take  it  as  if  all  his  pos- 
terity then  personally  sinned  in  him/  ^  Feigning  God 
to  make  Adam  not  onlv  the  natural  father  and  root  of 
mankind,  but  also  arbitrarily  a  constituted  representer 
of  all  the  persons  that  should  spring  from  him. 
Whence  they  infer  that  Christ  was,  by  God's  imposi- 
tion and  his  own  sponsion,  made  the  legal  representative 
person  of  every  one  of  the  elect,  taken  singularly  ;  so 
that  what  he  did  for  them  God  reputeth  them  to  have 
done  by  him.  Hereby  they  falsely  make  the  person 
of  the  Mediator  to  be  the  legal  person  of  the  sinner.' 
^  They  forge  a  law  that  God  never  made,  that  saith, 
"  Thou,  or  thy  surety,  shall  obey  perfectly,  or  die." ' 
'  They  feign  God  to  have  made  an  eternal  covenant 
with  his  Son.'  '  They  feign  Christ  to  have  made  such 
an  exchange  with  the  elect  that  having  taken  all  their 
sins  he  hath  given  them  all  his  righteousness,  not  only 
the  fruit  of  it,  but  the  thing  in  itself.'  '  They  say  that 
by  the  imputation  of  Christ's  righteousness,  habitual 
and  actual,  we  are  judged  perfectly  just.'  ^  They  talk 
of  justification  in  mere  ignorant  confusion.  They  say 
tliat  to  justify  is  not  to  make  righteous,  but  to  judge 
righteous.'  ^They  err  grossly,  saying,  that  l)y  "faith 
imputed  for  righteousness"  and  our  "being  justified  by 
faith,"  is  not  meant  the  act  or  habit  of  faith,  but  the 
object,  Christ's  righteousness,  not  stickling  thereby  to 
turn  such  texts  into  worse  than  nonsense.' 


THE   ENGLISH    HEADS   OF   AGREEMENT.  29 

*'  All  these  are  Mr.  Baxter's  words,  in  his  ^  Defence 
of  Christ/  ch.  ii.  These  things  which  our  churches, 
with  amazement,  behold  Mr.  Baxter  thus  calling  fic- 
tions, falsehoods,  forgeries,  ignorant  confusions  and 
gross  errors,  were  defended  by  Mr.  Norton  as  the  faith 
once  delivered  to  the  saints ;  nor  do  our  churches  at 
this  day  consider  them  as  any  other  than  glorious  truths 
of  the  Gospel."* 

The  reputation  of  Baxter's  learning  and  piety,  and 
the  fame  of  his  sufferings  under  the  persecutions  of 
the  High  Commission,  gave  ready  and  extensive  cur- 
rency to  his  views,  although  they  were  met  with  deter- 
mined opposition  from  the  beginning.  Soon  after  the 
institution  of  the  Pinners'  Hall  Lectures,  in  1672,  the 
introduction  there  of  these  opinions  created  uneasiness, 
and  induced  some  controversy  with  the  adherents  of 
the  evangelical  theology.  It  was  not,  however,  until 
after  the  death  of  Baxter  that  the  seeds  which  he  had 
profusely  sown  germinated  in  an  open  rupture.  About 
that  time  a  work  was  published  by  the  Rev.  Daniel 
Williams,  one  of  the  most  eminent  of  the  Presbyterian 
party,  which,  under  pretence  of  opposition  to  Antino- 
mianism,  strove  to  obscure  and  overturn  the  received 
doctrines  of  grace,  and  to  substitute  Baxterianism  in  their 
stead.  The  result  was  a  heated  controversy  and  the 
ultimate  exclusion  of  Dr.  Williams  by  the  patrons  of 
Pinners'  Hall  from  the  lectureship  which  he  there  held. 
The  partisans  of  the  new  theology,  together  with  many 
others  who  aspired  to  a  character  of  moderation  and 
"  candor,"  now  united  in  establishing  a  rival  lecture- 
ship, which  was  instituted  at  Salters'  Hall  in  1694.  In 
*  Magnalia  Americana,  vol.  i.,  p.  266. 


30  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

consequence  of  tins  separation,  the  meeting  at  Pinners' 
Hall,  where  the  Independents  were  predominant,  be- 
came the  rallying-point  of  the  defenders  of  the  Calvin- 
Istic  theology,  whilst  that  at  Salters'  Hall  was  the  head- 
quarters of  the  United  Brethren,  where  the  new  theo- 
logy was  cherished  and  propagated. 

But  the  pregnant  character  of  the  heresies,  which  had 
now  obtained  foothold  and  recognition,  was  not  the  only 
ominous  indication  in  the  United  Churches.  A  false 
moderation  had,"  in  the  minds  of  many,  usurped  the 
place  of  zeal  for  the  truth.  By  this  not  a  few  were 
ensnared  who  were  still  free  from  the  infection  of  doc- 
trinal error.  Under  the  pretence  of  superior  "  candor" 
and  liberality  of  sentiment  was  veiled  a  real  intolerance 
toward  those  who  felt  that  they  were  set  for  the  defence 
of  the  Gospel ;  and  this  was  associated  with  a  slothful 
indifference  to  the  errors  of  its  assailants.  Carried 
away  by  this  influence,  some  of  the  most  eminent  and 
excellent  men  of  the  age,  themselves  sound  in  the  faith, 
gave  their  countenance  to  the  authors  of  innovation, 
and  thus  lent  themselves  to  weaken  the  hands  of  the 
witnesses  for  the  truth.  Sucli  was  Henry,  the  commen- 
tator, himself  untainted  with  heresy,  yet  the  biographer 
of  Dr.  Benion,  to  whose  Neonomian  theology  he  gives 
the  implied  sanction  of  publication  without  censure. 
Stich  was  Howe,  the  chaplain  of  Cromwell,  the  most 
prominent  of  the  Independents,  who  withdrew  with 
Williams  from  Pinners'  Hall,  and  aided  in  establishing 
the  rival  lecture.  ^*  He  had  truly  a  great  soul,^'  says 
Calamy,  his  biographer,  "  and  at  the  same  time  a  very 
cool  and  moderate  spirit,  and  was  an  utter  enemy  to 
that  uncharitable  and  censorious  humor  that  is  visible 


f  y 


THE   ENGLISH    HEADS   OF   AGREEMENT.  31 

in  so  many.  He  did  not  look  upon  religion  as  a  sys- 
tem of  opinions,  or  a  set  of  forms,  so  much  as  a  divine 
discipline  to  reform  the  heart  and  lifej  In  lesser  mat- 
ters he  could  freely  give  others  the  liberty  of  their  own 
sentiments,  and  was  as  unwilling  to  impose  as  to  be 
imposed  on/'*  So  says  Dr.  Calamy,  his  contemporary 
and  biographer ;  and  in  describing  Howe  he  expresses 
his  own  and  the  prevailing  sentiments  of  the  age.  Op- 
position to  error  was  stigmatized  as  intolerance  and  ^ 
persecution,  and  earnestness  in  defence  of  the  truth  was 
looked  upon  as  indicative  of  bigotry  and  narrowness 
of  soul. 

Kear  akin  to  this  was  a  growing  disposition  to  decry 
doctrinal  preaching,  and  substitute  in  its  stead  the 
enforcement  of  practical  duties.  Since  "  religion  was 
not  a  system  of  opinions,  or  a  set  of  forms,  so  much  as 
a  divine  discipline  to  reform  the  heart  and  life,''  as 
Calamy  insists,  it  immediately  followed  that  the  preach- 
ing of  doctrinal  truth — the  promulgation  of  systems 
of  opinions — was  unprofitable,  and  the  preacher's  busi- 
ness ought  rather  to  be  the  laying  down  of  appropriate 
rules  of  discipline  for  the  reformation  of  the  feelings 
and  conduct. 

An  illustration  of  this  disposition  to  supersede  all 
doctrinal  instruction  presents  itself  in  a  volume  of  cate- 
chisms, of  which  we  shall  say  more  presently.  In  the 
prefece  parents  are  thus  admonished  :  "  They  are  con- 
siderable errors  in  the  method  of  education  that  parents 
take  more  pains  to  teach  their  children  the  doctrines 
than  the  duties  of  religion,  though  the  doctrines   are 

*  Howe's  Life,  prefixed  to  hi?  works,  New  York,  1835,  super-royal 
8vo.,  p.  51. 


32  HISTORY  OF   THE   NEW  SCHOOL. 

revealed  for  the  sake  of  the  duties ;  that  they  are  more 
careful  to  instruct  them  in  the  abstruse  and  darker  than 
,}  in  the  plain  doctrines  of  Christianity,  though  these  are 
always  the  most  important ;  that  they  too  much  neglect 
duties  to  men  and  those  inward  virtuous  tempers  which 
are  the  spring  of  these  duties,  though  duties  to  men 
who  need  our  love  and  service  are  as  strongly  insisted 
on  in  Scripture  as  duties  to  God  who  needs  them  not/'* 
Another  circumstance  conspired  to  facilitate  the  pro- 
cess of  declension.  The  Heads  of  Agreement  declared, 
that  ^^  As  to  what  appertains  to  soundness  of  judgment 
in  matters  of  faith,  we  esteem  it  sufficient  that  a  Church 
acknowledge  the  Scriptures  to  be  the  word  of  God,  the 
perfect  and  only  rule  ^of  faith  and  practice,  and  own 
either  the  doctrinal  part  of  those  commonly  called  the 
Articles  of  the  Church  of  England,  or  the  Confession, 
or  Catechisms,  Shorter  or  Larger,  compiled  by  the 
Assembly  at  Westminster,  or  the  Confession  agreed  on 
at  the  Savoy,  to  be  agreeable  to  said  rule."  Thus,  with 
abounding  liberality,  the  United  Churches  esteemed  it 
sufficient  to  acknowledge  either  of  five  several  docu- 
ments to  be  agreeable  to  the  word  of  God.  But  even 
this  rule,  moderate  as  were  its  demands,  applied  only  to 
the  churches.  For  the  ministry  no  provision  whatever 
was  made.  •  In  practice  the  candidate  drafted  his  own 
creed,  on  presentation  of  which,  if  satisfactory  to  the 
selected  council,  he  was  ordained.  Ultimately,  as  libe- 
ral principles  became  prevalent,  even  this  was  omitted, 
and  the  whole  matter  was  reduced  to  a  mere  profession 
of  faith  in  the  Scriptures  as  being  the  word  of  God. 
A  very  interesting  illustration  of  the  process  here 
*  Bourn's  Catechisms,  p.  23. 


THE  ENGLISH  HEADS  OF  AGREEMENT.      33 

indicated  is  presented  in  a  work  to  which  alhision  has 
ah'eady  been  made — a  volume  of  catechisms  for  the 
instruction  of  children  and  youth,  published  during  the 
progress  of  the  apostasy  by  Mr.  Samuel  Bourn.  It 
consists  of  a  short  and  a  large  doctrinal  and  an  histori- 
cal catechism  from  the  pen  of  Mr.  Bourn,  to  whicli  is 
added  an  edition  of  the  Westminster  Shorter  Catechism, 
altered  and  amended.  In  the  preface  we  are  informed 
that  "  'Tis  now  generally  thought  that  the  religious 
principles  set  forth  in  the  Bible  have  been  better  under- 
stood in  this  present  age,  through  the  free  and  diligent 
researches  of  the  learned,  than  they  had  been  in  any 
since  the  primitive  times.  As  there  are  still  farther 
advances  made  in  critical  learning,  and  by  the  later 
annotations  on  the  Scriptures  great  improvements  are 
made  upon  those  that  went  before,  no  considerate  per- 
son can  reasonably  think  that  in  ninety  years'  space  men 
of  letters  and  study  should  see  no  cause  for  giving  such 
accounts  of  the  doctrines  of  revelation  as  would  some 
way  or  other  vary  from  what  had  been  taught  before 
that  period,  especially  considering  that  the  teachers  of 
Christianity  in  this  nation  had  been  no  very  long  while 
out  of  the  Antichristian  darkness ;  how  much  of  their 
time  had  been  taken  up  in  defending  the  Reformation 
against  the  Romanists,  as  well  as  in  their  ordinary  min- 
isterial work,  and  how  little  they  had  left  for  thoroughly 
studying  the  inferior  points  of  gospel  divinity."* 

A  few  of  the  questions  of  the  Shorter  Catechism,  as 
here  amended,  will  serve  as  a  clue  to  the  whole  system. 
In  answer  to  the  fundamental  question.  What  is  sin  ? 
we  read  that  "  Sin  is  any  voluntary  want  of  conform i^- 

*  Bourn,  p.  276. 


34  HISTORY   OF   THE   XEW   SCHOOL. 

to  or  transgression  of  the  law  of  God/'  "The  fall 
brought  mankind  into  a  state  of  sin,  as  in  consequence 
of  the  fall  men  are  born  with  less  perfect  constitutions 
than  Adam  was  created  with,  were  more  liable  to  do 
evil  and  less  able  and  disposed  to  do  good,  which  be- 
came an  unhappy  inlet  to  actual  transgressions  and 
habits  of  wickedness/'  "  God  having  out  of  his  mere 
good  pleasure  purposed  from  eternity  to  show  special 
favor  to  mankind,  did  enter  into  a  covenant  of  grace,'' 
etc.  "  Effectual  calling  is  the  work  of  God's  Spirit,  by 
which  in  concurrence  with  his  Word  and  providence 
and  our  own  sincere  endeavors  he  so  cpnvinceth  us  of 
our  sin  and  misery,  and  enlightens  our  minds  in  the 
knowledge  of  Christ,  and  renews  our  wills,  as  to  per- 
suade and  enable  us  to  embrace  Jesus  Christ  freely 
offered  to  us  in  the  Gospel."  "  Justification  is  that  act 
of  the  free  grace  or  favor  of  God  wherein  he  pardoneth 
all  our  sins  and  accepteth  us  as  righteous  in  his  sight, 
through  Jesus  Christ,  upon  our  believing  in  him." 
"  Faith  in  Jesus  Christ  is  such  a  firm  and  hearty  per- 
suasion of  the  truth  of  his  Gospel  as  is  productive  of 
obedience  to  it."  One  additional  answer  will  complete 
the  outline  and  reveal  the  landing-place  of  this  scheme. 
Instead  of  the  Westminster  question  on  the  Trinity 
we  have  the  inquiry,  "  Do  not  the  Scriptures  give  an 
account  of  more  divine  persons  than  one  ?  The  Scrip- 
tures give  an  account  of  Father,  Son  and  Holy  Ghost, 
and  that  this  holy  Trinity  were  entirely  united  in  com- 
pleting the  most  glorious  of  all  God's  works." 

The  first  open  avowal  of  Arianism  was  in  Exeter, 
where  the  Rev.  James  Pierce,  after  much  trouble  and 
the  call  of  repeated  councils,  was  excluded  from  the 


THE  ENGLISH  HEADS  OF  AGREEMENT.      35 

churcli  of  which  he  had  charge  for  refusal  to  preach 
the  doctrine  of  the  Trinity.  He  had  previously  main- 
tained an  obstinate  silence  on  that  subject,  but  imme- 
diately upon  his  exclusion  erected  a  separate  congrega- 
tion, and  proclaimed  his  Arian  sentiments.  In  London 
the  defection  was  less  rapid  and  extensive  than  in  the 
country,  although  the  poison  was,  there,  too,  spreading 
its  secret  infection.  In  1730,  of  forty-four  Presbyte- 
rian ministers  in  the  city,  nineteen  were  professed  Cal- 
vinists,  twelve  Baxterians,  and  thirteen  Arminians — 
not  one  avowed  Arian.  Yet  among  them  was  Lardner, 
who  became  an  Arian  and  died  a  Socinian.  Others 
followed  in  the  same  course. ' 

As  the  defection  originated  in  the  doctrinal  views  of 
leading  Presbyterian  divines,  so  several  circumstances 
conspired  to  induce  its  development,  particularly  among 
the  churches  of  that  name.  Their  union  with  the  In- 
dependents had  stripped  them  of  every  safeguard  of 
their  own  system,  without  compensating  them  with 
even  the  feebler  barriers  of  Independency.  The  moral 
power  of  the  latter  system  is  essentially  dependent 
upon  a  conscientious  conviction  of  the  divine  right, 
and  consequent  duty  of  each  congregation  to  exercise 
the  functions  of  government  and  discipline  over  its  OAvn 
officers  and  members,  irrespective  and  independent  of 
any  other  tribunal.  Repudiating  as  they  did  this 
opinion,  it  was  not  to  be  expected  that  the  Presbyte- 
rian churches  should  assume  the  exercise  of  functions 
and  the  burden  of  responsibilities,  such  as  those  of 
persecution  for  heresy,  which  were  odious  in  them- 
selves, and  not  enforced  by  their  own  conscientious 
opinions  as  to  the  order  of  God's  house.      Hence,  the 


"> 


36  HISTORY   OF   THE   JsEW   SCHOOL. 

authors  of  innovation  were  much  less  liable  to  be 
brought  to  account  in  a  Presbyterian  than  in  an  Inde- 
pendent Church. 

The  respectable  social  rank  •  of  the  Presl)yterlan 
body,*  and  the  rich  endoAvments  which  it  gradually 
accumulated,  were  also  a  snare  to  its  own  people  and 
an  inducement  to  the  corrupt  and  designing  to  unite 
with  it.  The  reputation  of  tolerance  and  ^^  candor" 
naturally  caused  the  erroneous  to  coalesce  with  the 
Presbyterian  churches  rather  than  with  the  stricter 
Independents,  with  whom,  on  the  other  hand,  the 
faithful  ministers  and  people  of  God  everywhere  sided, 
'^ny  churches,  of  whatever  antecedents,  in  which  the 
new  doctrines  became  prevalent,  readily  arrayed  them- 
selves under  the  respectable  and  tolerant  banner,  on  the 
folds  of  which  was  inscribed  the  Presbvterian  name. 
On  the  contrary,  individuals  who  loved  the  truth  vrith- 
drew  from  the  backsliding  churches,  and  united  with 
Independent  congregations.  Sound  parts  of  Arian 
congregations,  separating  themselves,  formed  Indepen- 
dent churches,  and  whole  congregations,  as  their  pul- 
pits became  vacant,  sought  Inde^^endent  pastors  and 
assumed  that  name. 

Such  is  the  history  of  the  Socinian  apostasy  of  the 
nominal  Presbyterians  of  England.  Beginning  in  the 
theological  aberrations  of  the  sainted  Baxter,  it  ended 
in  blasphemies  against  the  Son  and  Spirit  of  God. 
Starting  out  with  a  denial  of  the  imputation  of  Adam's 
sin,  of  the  vicarious  satisfaction  of  Christ,  and  of  the 
imputation  of  his  obedience  and  sufferings,  nourished 
by  lax  principles  on  the  subject  of  subscription  to  the 
*  See  Davies'  Journal,  in  Foote's  Virginia,  pp.  245,  253. 


THE   ENGLISH    HEADS   OF   AGREEMENT.  37 

Confession,  and  free  from  the  trammels  of  a  scriptural 
discipline,  its  fatal  career  was  quickly  run.  Travers- 
ing the  systems  of  Arminius  and  Pelagius,  its  nominal 
results  were  reached  in  the  utter  denial  of  the  divinity 
of  Christ  and  of  the  existence  of  the  Holy  Spirit  of 
grace. 

That  apostasy  is  the  constant  appeal  of  Congrega- 
tional writers  in  proof  that  Presbyterianism  is  no  protec- 
tion against  fatal  heresies,  and  the  Heads  of  Agreement 
are  the  favorite  resort  of  our  New  School  brethren  in 
tracing  the  origin  of  that  liberal  policy  which  they  so 
much  admire.  The  facts  of  this  history  preclude  both 
■of  these  appeals.  The  ^^  liberal  Presbyterianism"  of 
England  originated  in  a  compelled  Independency.  Its 
organization  never  was  Presbyterian,  but  was  the  origi- 
nal of  Congregationalism,  and  it  resulted  in  Socinian 
heresy  and  a  return  to  Independency. 
4 


CHAPTER  II. 

THE   GENERAL   PRESBYTERY. 

Makemie  —  His  times  in  Ireland  and  Scotland  —  Persecutions — 
Effects  on  his  character — Scene  of  his  labors — Variety  of  his 
employments — Rev.  Nathaniel  Taylor — Ninian  Beall  and  Upper 
Marlborough — Religious  liberty  in  the  Middle  Colonies — Rev. 
John  Wilson — His  Scotch  correspondence — Rev.  Samuel  Davis — 
Rev.  Jedidiah  Andrews  and  the  church  in  Philadelphia — They 
were  Presbyterians — Rev.  John  Hampton  and  Rev.  George  Mac- 
nish — Occasion  of  forming  the  Presbytery — Its  constituents — No 
constitution  adopted — Designed  as  an  evangelic  society. 

At  a  meeting  of  the  Presbytery  of  Lagan,  in  the 
north  of  Ireland,  held  in  December,  1680,  a  commu- 
nication was  received  from  "  Colonel  Stevens,  in  Mary- 
land, beside  Virginia,"  asking  for  a  minister  for  that 
region.  In  the  preceding  January  the  Rev.  T.  Drum- 
mond  had  introduced  to  the  Presbytery  Mr.  Francis 
Makemie,  of  the  neighborhood  of  Ramelton,  in  Done- 
gal, as  a  candidate  for  the  ministry.  He  was  probably 
now  a  graduate  of  Glasgow  University.  ^^  Francisciis 
MakemiuSy  Scoto-Hi/bernus,'"'^  was  enrolled  a  student 
therein  in  1675.  He  w^as  licensed  by  the  Presbytery 
in  1681,  and  subsequently  ordained,  says  Reid,  "on 
the  call  of  Colonel  Stevens.'^  The  date  of  his  ordina- 
tion is  unknown,  as  the  records  of  the  Presbytery  are  a 

*  A  Scotch-Irishman. 
38 


THE    GENERAL    PRESBYTERY.  39 

blank  for  several  years  after  his  licensure.*  That  was 
the  darkest  hour  in  the  history  of  the  martyr  Church 
of  Scotland.  When  Makemie  entered  the  university 
of  Glasgow  in  1675,  Lauderdale  and  Sharpe  were  busy 
devising  and  executing  those  atrocious  measures  against 
the  Church  which  even  Sir  Walter  Scott  asserts  might 
have  been  suggested  by  Satan  himself,  and  which  pressed 
more  and  more  heavily  in  the  following  years.  In 
1678  the  "Highland  Host^'  was  brought  down  upon 
the  people,  and  its  atrocities  may  have  been  witnessed 
by  Makemie  himself,  as  they  passed  through  Glasgow. 
Grahame  of  Claverhouse  began  his  bloody  career  the 
next  year,  and  when  Makemie  was  licensed,  in  1681, 
the  Duke  of  York,  afterward  King  James,  was  him- 
self in  Scotland  superintending  and  stimulating  the 
zeal  of  the  persecutors,  and  feasting  his  own  eyes  with 
the  personal  inspection  of  the  agonies  of  his  victims 
under  the  tortures  of  the  boot. 

Ireland  was  at  this  time  comparatively  at  rest.  But 
the  Presbytery  of  Lagan  having,  in  1681,  appointed  a 
fast,  no  doubt  with  reference  to  the  state  of  public 
affairs,  they  were  harassed  with  prosecutions,  fines  and 
imprisonments,  and  in  consequence  there  remain  for 
several  years  no  records  of  their  proceedings.  During 
this  interval  Makemie  was  ordained,  and  from  the  mode 
in  which  in  a  passage  presently  to  be  cited  he  refers  to 
that  service  as  performed  by  "  godly,  learned  and  judi- 
cious discerning  men,''  without  speaking  of  the  Presby- 
tery distinctively,  it  seems  probable  that  the  meeting 
was  not  a  regular  session  of  that  body,  but  a  private 

*  Eeid's  History  of  the  Presbyterian  Church  in  Ireland,  vol.  ii., 
p.  324. 


40  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

assembly  of   sueh   of   the   members   as   were   able   to 
convene. 

Of  the  ordination  services  the  only  information  we 
have  is  contained  in  his  own  "  Answer  to  George 
Keith's  Libel  on  a  Catechism  published  by  F.  Make- 
mie."  In  this  publication  he  says  :  "  I  am  constrained 
to  justify  my  office  from  these  uncharitable  calumnies, 
and,  that  grace  might  be  magnified,  by  giving  this  rela- 
tion, in  the  sight  of  an  all-seeing  and  all-present  God ; 
that,  ere  I  received  the  imposition  of  hands,  in  that 
scriptural  and  orderly  way  of  separation  unto  my  holy 
and  ministerial  calling,  I  gave  requiring  satisfaction,  to 
godly,  learned  and  judicious  discerning  men,  of  a  work 
of  grace  and  conversion  wrought  in  my  heart,  by  the 
Holy  Spirit,  in  my  fourteenth  year,  by  and  from  the 
pains  of  a  godly  schoolmaster,  who  used  no  small  dili- 
gence in  gaining  tender  souls  to  God's  service  and  fear ; 
since  which  time,  to  the  glory  of  God^s  free  grace  be  it 
spoke,  I  have  had  the  sure  experiences  of  God's  deal- 
ings with  me,  according  to  his  infinite  and  unerring 
wisdom,  for  my  unspeakable  comfort.'^* 

Thus  early  grounded  in  the  faith  by  a  personal  expe- 
rience of  its  power,  educated  amid  the  scenes  of  a  bitter 
persecution,  trained  and  brouglit  forward  by  a  pastor, 
Mr.  Drummondf  who  had  lain  in  prison  six  years  for 
the  testimony  of  the  Gospel ;  ordained  to  the  work  of 
missions  upon  a  call  to  go  to  the  far-off  wilds  of  the 
new  world, — Makemie  went  forth  at  the  voice  of  God, 

*  Webster's  History  of  the  Presbyterian  Church,  p.  299. 

f  Whence  did  Drnmmondtown,  Accoraac  county,  Va.,  the  scene  of 
Makemie's  early  hibors,  derive  its  name,  if  not  from  that  of  this  gen- 
tleman ? 


THE   GENERAL   PRESBYTERY.  41 

not  knowing  whither  he  went,  but  strong  in  faith,  and 
bearing  aloft  the  banner  of  the  cross,  inscribed  with  ^ 
that  noble  legend  most  fitting  to  become  the  motto  of 
the  Church  which  his  labors  founded ;  Preces  et  lachry- 
mcB  arnia  sunt  ecdeske :  "  Prayers  and  tears  are  the 
avTRS  of  the  Church."^  ^ 

In  this,  his  early  history  we  have  the  secret  of  the  de- 
votion to  the  doctrines  of  our  standards  which  inspired 
Makemie's  noble  testimony  in  the  presence  of  Corn- 
bury  :  -"  As  to  our  doctrines,  my  lord,  we  have  our 
Confession  of  Faith,  which  is  known  to  the  Christian 
world,  and  I  challenge  all  the  clergy  of  Yorkf  to  show 
us  any  false  or  pernicious  doctrines  therein.'^  Here, 
too,  is  the  source  of  that  lofty  and  magnanimous  spirit 
which  dictated  his  memorable  reply  to  the  demands  of 
the  petty  tyrant,  that  he  and  Hampton  should  give 
bond  and  security  for  their  good  behavior,  and  '^  also 
bond  and  security  to  preach  no  more  in  my  govern- 
ment."! "  As  to  our  behavior,"  said  Makemie, ''  though 
we  have  no  way  broke  it,  endeavoring  always  so  to  live 
*  as  to  keep  a  conscience  void  of  offence  toward  God 
and  man,'  yet,  if  your  lordship  requires  it,  we  would 
give  security  for  our  behavior;  but  to  give  bond  and 
security  to  preach  no  more  in  your  Excellency's  govern- 
ment, if  invited  and  desired  by  any  people,  we  neither 
can  nor  dare  do."§  Noble  words !  Worthy  of  record 
beside  those  of  the  great  Reformer  at  Worms !     Such 

*  The  motto  of  Makemie's  sermon  in  New  York,  for  preacliing 
which  he  was  imprisoned  by  Cornbury. — Presbyterian  Magazine, 
vol.  ii.,  p.  37.  -^^ 

J  That  is,  of  New  York,  called  York  throughout  his  "Narrative." 

;J:  Makemie's  Narrative,  in  Hill's  Plistory,  p.  177. 

I  Makemie,  in  Hill,  p.  178. 
4  * 


42  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

was  the  man  who  laid  the  foundations  of  our  Church. 
May  she  ever  be  true  to  his  devoted  spirit ! 

Makemie's  ordination  and  removal  to  America  pro- 
bably occurred  in  1682,  or  early  in  1683,  as  it  took 
j)lace  in  resj^onse  to  the  application  of  Colonel  Stevens, 
which  was  received  in  December,  1680.  On  the  2d 
of  Aprilj  1682,  he  preached  for  the  Rev.  William 
Hampton,  of  Burt,  in  Donegal,*  and  on  the  22d  of 
July,  1684,  writes  a  letter  from  Elizabeth  River,  Va., 
to  the  Rev.  Increase  Mather,  of  Boston,  from  the  tenor 
of  which  it  is  evident  that  he  had  been  alreadv  some 
time  in  America. f 

Colonel  William  Stevens,  at  whose  invitation  Make- 
mie  came,  was  a  resident  of  Rehoboth,  Md.,  a  judge  of 
the  county  court,  deputy-lieutenant  of  the  province, 
and  one  of  the  lord  proprietary's  council.  The  lower 
part  of  the  eastern  shore  of  Maryland  was  early  settled 
by  refugees  from  the  persecutions  in  Scotland.};  It 
was  on  their  behalf  that  Stevens'  letter  was  written, 
and  probably  among  them  INIakemie's  first  labors  were 
employed.  "  There  is  record  evidence  of  the  fact  that 
there  were  five  church  edifices  and  as  many  organ- 
ized Presbyterian  congregations  in  Somerset  county  *on 
the  13th  day  of  May,  1705"§— those  of  Snow  Hill, 
Pitt's  Creek,  Wicomico,  Mon-okin  and  Rehoboth — 
gathered,  without  doubt,  by  the  labors  of  Makemie,  as 
there  is  no  evidence  of  any  other  minister  preceding 
him  there.      In  Viroinia  his  stated  ministrations  ex- 

*  Reid,  vol.  ii.,  p.  324.  f  See  the  letter  in  Webster,  p.  297. 

X  Spence's   Letters  on   the  Early    History  of  Presbyterianism   in 
America,  p.  80. 
\  Spence,  p.  82. 


THE    GENERAL    PRESBYTERY.  43 

tended  to  Accomac  county,  on  the  eastern  shore,  and 
to  Lynnhaven,  on  Elizabeth  River,  in  Princess  Ann 
county.  Here  was  a  church  organized  some  years  be- 
fore Makemie's  coming.  Its  nameless  Irish  pastor  died 
in  August,  1683,  and  Makemie  being  providentially 
driven  into  that  port  on  a  voyage  of  exploration  from 
Maryland  to  Ashley  river,  in  South  Carolina,  he  was 
induced  "  to  stay  that  season."  He  was  still  there  in 
the  summer  of  1685,  and  at  his  death  had  j^i'operty  in 
the  place.* 

Abundant  thus  in  his  ministerial  labors  Makemie^ 
supported  himself  by  commerce,  in  which  he  seems  to 
have  been  extensively  engaged.  In  fact,  if  we  may 
believe  Cornbury,  his  employments  were  even  still 
more  various.  ^'  He  is  a  Jack-of-all-trades.  He  is  a 
preacher,  a  doctor  of  physic,  a  merchant,  an  attorney, 
a  counsellor-at-law,  and,  which  is  worst  of  all,  a  dis- 
turber of  governments.^t  "You,  sir,  know  law?"  de- 
manded Cornbury  of  him,  in  surprise  at  the  clearness 
of  his  defence  when  impeached  of  preaching  contrary 
to  law.  "  I  do  not,  my  lord,  pretend  to  know  law ;  but 
I  pretend  to  know  this  particular  law,  having  had  sun- 
dry disputes  thereon."t  He  needed  to  know  the  law, 
for  "  it  is  a  matter  of  tradition  that  he  suffered  often 
under  the  laws  of  Virginia.  ^  He  durst  not  deny 
preaching,  and  hoped  he  never  should,  while  it  was 
wanting;  and  desired.' "§     Thus  he  became  "a  disturber 

*  Webster,  pp.  297,  298.     Foote's  Sketches,  i.,  p.  45. 
f  Cornbury  to  the  Lords  Commissioners  of  Trade  and  Plantations, 
in  Webster,  p.  307. 

X  Makemie's  Narrative,  in  Hill,  p.  179. 
^  Foote's  Sketches,  part  i.,  p.  47. 


44        •  HISTOEY   OF    THE    NEW   SCHOOL. 

of  governments,"  a  true  follower  of  Him  who  "  came 
\   not  to  send  peace  on  the  earth,  but  a  sword." 

One  of  the  earliest  of  Makemie's  fellow-laborers  was 
Nathaniel  Taylor,  of  Upper  Marlborough,  Maryland. 
Colonel  Ninian  Beall  had  fled  from  persecution  in  Scot- 
land and  found  a  refuge  in  JNIaryland.  As  early  as 
1689  he  was  already  a  prominent  man  in  the  colony.* 
^'  Some  years  after  his  arrival  he  made  a  purchase  of 
several  large  tracts  of  land  from  the  tribe  of  Piscata- 
way  Indians.  On  one  of  these  tracts  he  laid  out  the 
town  of  Upper  Marlborough,  and  there  fixed  his  resi- 
dence. Remembering  that  he  had  a  large  number  of 
relations  at  home  subjected  to  the  same  sufferings  from 
which  he  had  escaped,  he  wrote  to  his-  friends  to  come 
over  to  Maryland  and  participate  in  his  haj^piness,  urg- 
ing it  upon  them,  at  the  same  time,  to  bring  with  them 
a  faithful  minister  of  the  Gospel.  They  arrived  some 
inonths  afterward,  accompanied  by  the  Rev.  Mr.  Tay- 
lor, their  pastor."t  The  date  of  his  arrival  is  unknown. 
All  the  circumstances  would  indicate  it  to  have  been 
some  time  before  the  beginning  of  the  seventeenth  cen- 
tury. His  church  was  known  on  the  records  indiffer- 
ently as  Marlborough  and  Patuxent. 
y  tn  Virginia  toleration  was  allowed  to  Dissenters  only 
where  the  sterile  soil  refused  a  sufficient  crop  of  tobacco 
to  stimulate  the  cupidity  of  the  parsons  of  the  Estab- 
lishment. "  'Tis  observed,"  says  Beverly,  writing  in 
1705,  "that  those  counties  where  the  Presbyterian 
meetings  are  produce  very  mean  tobacco,  and  for  tliat 

*  Webster,  p.  68,  note. 

t  Eev.  Dr.  Balch,  in  the  Princeton  Keview,  1840,  p.  346.     Mrs. 
Bulcli  was  descended  from  Colonel  Beall. 


THE   GENERAL   PRESBn:ERY.  45 

reason  can^t  get  an  orthodox  minister  to  stay  among 
them."*  In  Maryland  religious  liberty,  secured  by  a 
charter  from  a  Protestant  king  to  a  Catholic  proprie- 
tary, invited  extensive  immigration  from  Ireland  and 
Scotland.  In  Pennsylvania,  too,  and  the  Jerseys  relig- 
ious liberty,  a  fertile  soil  and  a  salubrious  climate 
attracted  the  steps  of  many  of  the  exiles  of  persecution. 

At  New  Castle,  Delaware,  which  was  then  attached 
to  Pennsylvania,  was  a  congregation  of  which  the  Rev. 
John*  Wilson  was  the  pastor.  His  coming  must  have 
been  at  an  early  date,  as  already,  in  1686,  William 
Huston  had  by  will  left  to  Wilson  and  his  successors 
a  tract  of  land  of  three  hundred  acres  on  Christiana 
Creek,  four  or  five  miles  from  New  Castle.f 

About  1702,  having  some  cause  of  dissatisfaction, 
he  withdrew  from  the  church  at  New  Castle ;  but,  in 
1703  returned.  His  Scotch  origin  is  indicated  by  his 
being  appointed  by  the  Presbytery  in  1707  to  corres- 
pond with  Scotland  for  the  purpose  of  securing  a  min- 
ister for  Lewes,  Delaware.  He  and  Mr.  Makemie  were 
appointed  to  write  to  Scotland  to  Mr.  Alexander  Col- 
din,  minister  of  Oxam,  of  the  Presbytery  of ,  to 

signify  the  earnest  desires  of  the  people  in  and  about 
Lewestown  for  his  coming  over  to  be  their  minister. 
"  The  Presbytery  appoints  Mr.  John  Wilson  to  write 

to  the  Presbytery  of to  the  effect  aforesaid,  and 

make  a  report  of  his  care  herein  against  the  next  Pres- 
bytery."! 

Mr.  Makemie  may  have  been  personally  acquainted 

*  Beverly,  in  Foote,  i.,  p.  51. 

f  Colonial  Documents,  in  Webster,  p,  311. 

X  Records  of  the  Presbyterian  Church,  p.  10. 


46  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

with  Mr.  Coklin,  who  was  reported  to  the  Scotch  As- 
sembly, in  1689,  as  a  minister  in  regular  standing  in  the 
Irish  Church ;  and  enumerated  with  others  who  were 
then  supposed  to  be  in  Scotland.* 

Again,  when,  in  1710,  the  General  Presbytery  opened 
correspondence  with  the  Presbytery  of  Dublin  and  the 
Synod  of  Glasgow,  the  Rev.  John  Plenry,  who  had 
been  received,  the  previous  year,  from  Dublin  Presby- 
tery, was  appointed  to  write  to  that  body;  and  Mr. 
Wilson  and  Mr.  James  Anderson  were  the  committee 
to  correspond  with  the  latter. f  Mr.  Anderson  had 
been  ordained  and  sent  out,  as  a  missionary  to  Amer- 
ica, by  the  Presbytery  of  Irvine,  in  the  Synod  of 
Glasgow. 

It  is  impossible  to  account  for  the  prominent  position 
given  to  Wilson  in  this  Scotch  correspondence, — pre- 
ferred to  all  the  other  members  of  the  Presbytery, 
and  placed  in  marked  precedence  over  Makemie  and 
Anderson,  unless  we  suppose  him  to  have  been  from 
Scotland. 
y  Samuel  Davis  was  another  Presbyterian  minister, 
residing  in  Delaware,  at  the  close  of  the  seventeenth 
century.  He  was,  however,  so  absorbed  in  trade  as 
to  prevent  his  fulfilling  the  duties  of  a  pastor.  He 
preached  occasionally  at  Lewes,  and  was  present  at  the 
organization  of  the  Presbytery;  which,  however,  he 
attended  but  once  afterward.  Of  his  origin  and  his- 
tory  but  little  further  is  known. 

Philadelphia  was  visited  by  Makemie,  in  1692,  but 
no  marked  results  seem  to  have  followed.     It  was  not 

*  Reid,  ii.,  p.  513. 

f  Records  of  Presbyterian  Church,  p.  19. 


THE   GENERAL   PRESBYTERY^  47 

until  the  summer  of  1698,  that  Mr.  Andrews  removed 
to  that  place  and  commenced  his  labors.  He  was  from 
Massachusetts,  a  graduate  of  Harvard,  in  1695.  He 
was  probably  ordained  by  an  occasional  Presbytery,  in 
the  fall  or  winter  of  1701.  His  Hecord  of  Baptisms 
and  Marriages,  begins,  1701,  tenth  month,*  fourteenth 
day.  Says  Talbot,  the  Church  missionary  at  Burling- 
ton, wTitIng  April  24,  1702, — "  The  Presbyterians,  here, 
come  a  great  way,  to  lay  hands  on  one  another.  ...  In 
Philadelphia  one  pretends  to  be  a  Presbyterian,  and  has 
a  congregation  to  which  he  preaches.^f  I^i  1703,  Keith 
writes  from  Philadelphia,  '^  They  have  here  a  Presby- 
terian meeting  and  minister, — one  called  Andrews,  but 
they  are  not  likely  to  increase  here.^'J  It  thus  appears, 
that,  although  Andrews  was  from  New  England,  he 
and  his  people  were  avowed  Presbyterians  some  years 
before  the  organization  of  the  Presbytery. 

Two  other  names  make  up  the  list  of  those  who  were 
connected  with  the  Presbytery  in  its  origin.  In  the 
summer  of  1704,  Makemie  sailed  for  Great  Britain, 
from  whence  he  returned  the  next  year,  bringing  with 
him  John  Hampton  and  George  Macnish.  Mr.  Hamp- 
ton may  have  been  a  relative  of  the  Pev.  William 
Hampton,  of  Burt,  before  jnentloned.  Macnish  is 
stated  by  Peid  to  have  been  from  Ulster,  a  represen- 
tation wdilch  is  perfectly  consistent  with  the  unques- 
tionable evidence  that  he  was  a  native  of  Scotland.  So 
intimate  was  the  relation  between  the  churches  in  the 

*  "  Tenth  month," — December.     The  year  formerly  began  with  the 
25th  of  March. 

f  Hawkins'  Missions  of  the  Englisli  Church,  in  Webster,  p.  314. 
X  Keith,  in  Gillett's  History  of  the  Presbyterian  Church,  vol.  i.,  p.  21. 


48  HISTORY   OF   THE    NEW   SCHOOL. 

two  countries,  that  such  translations  were  of  constant 
occurrence. 

Probably,  the  return  of  Makemie  from  this  voyage 
was  the  occasion  for  the  organization  of  the  Presbytery. 
He  had  brouo;ht  with  him  a  considerable  reinforce- 
ment  to  the  ministry  in  the  field,  including,  it  is  be- 
lieved, not  only  Messrs.  Hampton  and  Macnish,  but 
Mr.  John  Boyd,  a  licentiate,  who  was  soon  after  or- 
dained. He  had  secured  the  promise  of  the  London 
ministers,  "  to  undertake  the  support  of  two  itinerants, 
for  the  space  of  two  years,  and,  after  that,  to  send  two 
more,  on  the  same  conditions,  allowing  the  former,  after 
that  time  to  settle.^'*  These  were  considerations  which 
could  not  but  stimulate  the  scattered  Presbyterians  to 
new  interest  and  encouragement  in  their  labors,  and 
suggest  to  them  the  importance  of  organization,  in 
order  to  avail  themselves  efficiently  of  the  advantages 
thus  presented,  and  to  exercise  a  judicious  suj^ervision 
over  the  itinerant  labors  about  to  be  bestowed  upon 
the  field. 

The  first  leaf  of  the  records  of  the  Presbytery  is  lost, 
so  that  we  are  uninformed  as  to  the  time  and  place  of 
the  first  meeting,  and  the  members  then  present.  As  it 
appears  in  the  defective  record,  the  body,  in  1706,  con- 
sisted of  Messrs.  Francis  Makemie,  Moderator,  Jedi- 
diah  Andrews,  John  Hampton,  John  Wilson,  Nathaniel 
Taylor,  George  Macnish,  and  Samuel  Davis.  The  first 
remaining  minutes  are  occupied  with  the  trials  and 
ordination  of  Mr.  John  Boyd,  which  took  place  in 
December,  1706.      He  was  a  native  of  Scotland,  and 

*  Eecords  of  Presbyterian  Church,  p.  20. 


THE   GENERAL   PRESBYTERY.  49 

labored  at  Freehold  and  Middletown,  New  Jersey, 
where  he  died,  in  1708.* 

About  fifteen  congregations  were,  at  first,  connected 
with  the  Presbytery;  of  which  two  were  in  Virginia, 
six  in  Maryland,  five  in  Pennsylvania  and  Delaware, 
and  two  in  New  Jersey.  With  one  exception,  these 
all  seem  to  have  been  composed  of  Scotch  and  Irish 
emigrants.  Mr.  Andrews'  church  was  "made  up  of 
divers  nations.^f 

It  has  been  common  to  represent  the  Presbytery  as 
originally  organized,  by  a  compromise  between  Presby- 
terians and  Congregationalists.  But,  there  is  not  a  trace 
of  evidence  that  any  member  of  the  body  Avas  a  Con- 
gregationalist,  or,  that  any  one  of  them,  except  Andrews, 
was  from  New  England;  and  he  was  anjDldSide  Pres- 
byterian. 

Of  any  defined  principles  or  terms  of  union,  or  formal 
constitution,  adopted  by  the  Presbytery,  we  have  no 
intimation.  Certainly,  there  was  no  act  or  record  form- 
ally adopting  the  AYestminster  Standards. J  "As  far 
as  I  know,"  said  the  Rev.  John  Thomson,  "we  have 
not  any  particular  system  of  doctrines,  composed  by 
ourselves  or  others,  which  we,  by  any  judicial  act  of  our 
Church,  have  adopted  to  be  the  articles  or  confession  of 
our  faith,  etc.  Now,  a  church  without  a  confession, 
what  is  it  like?  It  is  true,  as  I  take  it,  we  all  generally 
acknowledge  and  look  upon  the  Westminster  Confes- 
sion and  Catechisms  to  be  our  confession,  or  what  we 
own  for  such ;  but  the  most  that  can  be  said  is,  that 

*  Webster,  p.  323. 

f  Andrews'  Letter  to  Colman,  in  "Webster,  p.  105. 
X  See  Assembly's  Digest,  p.  25. 
5 


50  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

the  Westminster  Confession  of  Faitli  is  the  confession 
of  the  faith  of  the  generality  of  our  members,  ministers 
and  people ;  but,  that  it  is  our  confession  as  we  are  a 
united  body  politic,  I  cannot  see,  unless  it  hath  been 
received  by  a  conjunct  act  of  the  representatives  of  the 
Church."* 

In  fact,  the  transaction  in  which  our  Church  organi- 
zation, on  this  continent,  originated,  seems  to  have  been 
of  the  simplest  and  most  unpretending  nature.  Cer- 
tain brethren,  who  knew  each  other,  as  Presbyterians 
of  the  Westminster  Confession,  and  who  had  been  accus- 
tomed to  meet  and  consult  together,  occasionally  and  in- 
formally as  on  occasion  of  Andrews'  ordination,  now  found 
the  interests  of  the  cause  of  Christ  to  demand  more 
formal  and  stated  deliberations,  and,  therefore,  determined 
to  meet  annually,  for  the  transaction  of  business,  without 
alluding  to  the  circumstance, — or,  perhaps,  even  in  their 
own  minds  adverting  to  it, — that  they  were,  in  fact, 
marking  the  lines  of  a  new  and  distinct  division  of  the 
camps  of  Israel.  They  knew  and  mutually  recognized 
each  oiilier,  as  men  sworn  and  faithful  to  the  truth,  as 
set  forth  in  the  Westminster  symbols.  And  the  very 
unquestioned  familiarity  of  the  fact  precluded  the  sug- 
gestion of  its  being  formally  placed  upon  record,  until 
the  circumstances  of  the  growing  Church,  and  dangers 
threatening  from  without,  called  attention  to  the  neces- 
sity. They  regarded  themselves,  in  fact,  as  only  a 
branch  of  the  Church  of  Scotland,  subject  to  its  con- 
stitution, and  dependent  upon  its  patronage,  and  there- 
fore did  not  need  to  adopt  a  constitution  for  themselves. 

Whilst  the  records  are  silent  on  this  point,  there  is 

*  Digest,  p.  28. 


THE   GENERA!^   PRESBYTERY.  51 

another  on  which  they  are  explicit.  The  distinct  de- 
sign of  fhe  fathers  of  onr  Church,  in  organizing  them- 
selves into  a  Presbytery,  was  the  erection  of  an  evan- 
gelic society, — an  executive  organ  for  the  propagation 
of  the  Gospel.  In  a  letter,  addressed  to  Sir  Edmund 
Harrison,  of  London,  in  May,  1709,  they  set  forth  the 
deplorable  condition,  spiritually,  of  the  colonies;  and 
urged  the  Christian  people  of  London  to  come  to  their 
help.  "  The  negotiation  begun  and  encouraged  by  a 
fund,  in  the  time  when  our  worthy  friend,  Mr.  Makemie, 
now  deceased,  was  with  you,  for  evangelizing  these  colo- 
nies, was  a  business  exceeding  acceptable  to  a  multi- 
tude of  people,  and  was  likely  to  have  been  of  great 
service,  if  continued;  which  makes  us  much  grieved 
that  so  valuable  a  design  was  so  soon  after  its  begin- 
ning, laid  aside.  The  necessity  of  carrying  on  the  same 
affair  being  as  great,  if  not  greater,  now,  than  it  was 
then,  we  hope  that  our  patrons  in  London  will  revive 
so  good  and  important  a  work,  and  not  let  it  lie  buried 
under  the  ashes.  .  .  .  That  our  evangelical  affairs  may 
be  the  better  managed,  we  have  formed  ourselves  into 
a  Presbytery,  annually  to  be  convened  at  this  city ;  at 
which  times,  it  is  a  sore  distress  and  trouble  unto  us, 
that  we  are  not  able  to  comply  with  the  desires  of  sun- 
dry places,  crying  unto  us  for  ministers,  to  deal  forth  the 
word  of  life  unto  them.  Therefore,  we  must  earnestly 
beseech  you,  in  the  bowels  of  our  Lord,  to  intercede 
with  the  ministers  of  London,  and'  other  well-affected 
gentlemen,  to  extend  their  charity  and  pity  to  us,  and 
to  carry  on  so  necessary  and  glorious  a  work.''* 

Let  it  never  be  forgotten  that  our  Church  was  des- 
*  Letter  in  Kecords  of  Presbyterian  Church,  p.  16. 


62  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

tilled,  in  its  very  origin,  and  erected,  to  be  an  evangel- 
ical society,  to  conduct  under  its  own  supervision,  the 
business  of  giving  the  Gospel  to  the  world.  In  this 
capacity,  and  with  this  intent,  not  only  were  the  labors 
of  these  men  of  God  multiplied  and  untiring,  but  their 
applications  for  ministers  and  the  means  of  their  sup- 
port, until  settled  here,  were  assiduous  and  importu- 
nate, to  the  London  ministers,  and  to  the  Presbytery 
of  Dublin,  and  the  Synod  of  Glasgow;  to  the  former 
of  whom,  they  through  Sir  Edmund  Harrison  of  Lon- 
don first  wrote  in  1709,  and  to  the  latter,  in  1710 ;  and 
repeatedly  afterward. 


CHAPTER    III. 

THE    ADOPTING    ACT. 

Growth  of  the  Presbytery — Twelve  Glasgow  collegians — Scotch  eccle- 
siastical order  observed — Synod  subdivided — Subscription  contro- 
versy, in  Ireland — The  Belfast  society — Defections  in  Switzerland, 
England  and  Scotland — The  Irish  Pacific  Act — Controversy — Ex- 
clusion of  the  non-subscribers — They  lapse  into  Unitarianism — 
Subscription  in  New  Castle  Presbytery  —  New  elements  in  the 
Synod — THomscm's  overture — What  he  proposed — Causes  of  dis- 
trust among  the  "English  and  Welsh" — Surmises  of  Andrews — 
Dickinson's  opposition — Moderation  of  the  Synod — The  Synod  of 
1729 — Thomson's  overture  committed — Preliminary  Act — Adopt- 
ing Act — The  Directory  and  Discipline  recommended. 

The  troubles  to  which  the  Irish  Church  was  sub- 
jected, from  the  machinations  of  the  High  Church  party, 
under  the  countenance  of  Queen  Anne,  operated  greatly 
to  increase  the  strength  of  the  infant  Presbytery  in 
America.  On  the  1st  of  August,  1716,  the  Rev.  James 
Anderson  writes  to  Dr.  Sterling,  Principal  of  Glasgow 
College, — "  In  this  country  there  are,  since  I  came  here, 
(seven  years,)  settled  three  other  Presbyterian  ministers, 
two  of  which  are  from  your  city  of  Glasgow.  There 
are,  in  all,  of  ministers  who  meet  in  a  Preslbytery  once 
a  year,  sometimes  in  Philadelphia,  sometimes  here,  in 
New  Castle,  seventeen ;  and  two  probationers  from  the 
north  of  Ireland,  whom  we  have  under  trial  for  ordi- 
6  *  63 


64  HISTOEY   OF  THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

uation ;  twelve  of  which  have  had  the  most  and  best  of 
their  education  at  your  famous  university  of  Glasgow. 
We  are  mostly  but  young,  raw,  hands ;  yet,  glory  to  our 
God !  he  magnifies  and  perfects  his  strength  in  our 
weakness,  and  makes  it  evident  that  he  can  work  won- 
ders of  grace,  by  poor  means  and  insignificant  instru- 
ments. 

"  As  to  our  proceedings,  in  matters  of  public  worship 
and  discipline,  we  make  it  our  business  to  follow  the 
Directory  of' the  Church  of  Scotland,  which,  as  well  -as 
we  may,  we  own  as  our  mother  Church.  We  make  it 
our  business  to  settle,  and  to  make  settlements  for,  min- 
isters of  our  persuasion,  that  join  with  us,  in  places 
where  the  Gospel  has  either  never  at  all  been  preached, 
or  else,  in  places  where  there  are  wretched,  profane,  de- 
bauched, careless  creatures  of  the  Bishop  of  London, 
of  which  there  has  been  not  a  few,  and  yet  are,  within 
the  bounds  of  these  provinces,  whence  some  of  our 
brethren  meet;*  which  is  the  reason  of  our  meeting 
with  many  hardships  and  difficulties,  both  from  the 
inconveniences  of  our  congregations  and  the  opposition 
of  inverate  enemies. "f 

A  few  weeks  after  the  writing  of  this  letter,  the  Pres- 
bytery erected  itself  into  a  Synod.  On  the  21st  of 
September,  1716,  it  recorded  that,  "it  having  pleased 
Divine  Providence  so  to  increase  our  number,  as  that, 
after  much  deliberation,  we  judge  it  may  be  more  ser- 
viceable to  the  interest  of  religion,  to  divide  ourselves 

*  Dr.  Hawks,  in  his  "  Contributions  to  the  Ecclesiastical  History  of 
the  United  States,"  fully  confirms  and  illustrates  the  justice  of  this 
account  of  the  early  clergy  of  Maryland  and  Virginia. 

f  See  the  letter  in  Presbyterian  Magazine,  vol.  i.,  p.  278. 


THE  ADOPTING  ACT.  55 

into  subordinate  meetings  or  Presbyteries,  constituting 
one  annually  as  a  Synod,  to  meet  at  Philadelphia  or 
elsewhere,  to  consist  of  all  the  members  of  each  subor- 
dinate Presbytery  or  meeting,  for  this  year  at  least, — 
therefore  it  is  agreed  by  the  Presbytery,  after  serious  de- 
liberation, that  the  first  subordinate  meeting  or  Presby- 
tery, to  meet  at  Philadelphia  or  elsewhere,  as  they  shall 
see  fit,  do  consist  of  the  following  members,  viz. :  Masters 
Andrews,  Jones,  Powell,  Orr,  Bradner,  and  Morgan. 
And  the  second,  to  meet  at  New  Castle  or  elsewhere  as 
they  shall  fit,  to  consist  of  these,  viz. :  Masters  Ander- 
son, McGill,  Gillespie,  Wotherspoon,  Evans,  and  Conn. 
The  third,  to  meet  at  Snowhill  or  elsewhere,  to  consist 
of  these,  viz.:  Masters  Davis,  Hampton  and  Henry. 
And,  in  consideration  that  only  our  brethren,  Mr.  Mac- 
nish  and  Mr.  Pumry,  are  of  our  number  upon  Long 
Island,  at  present, — we  earnestly  recommend  it  to  them 
to  use  their  best  endeavors  w^ith  the  neighboring  breth- 
ren, that  are  settled  there,  which,  as  yet,  join  not  with 
us,  to  join  with  them  in  erecting  a  fourth  Presbytery. 
And  as  to  the  time  of  the  meeting  of  the  respective 
Presbyteries,  it  is  ordered  that  it  be  left  to  their  own 
discretion. 

'^  Ordered,  that  a  book  be  kept,  by  each  of  the  said 
Presbyteries,  containing  a  record  of  their  proceedings, 
and  that  the  said  book  be  brought,  every  year,  to  our 
anniversary  Synod  to  be  revised.^'* 

The  endeavors  of  the  Long   Island   brethren  were 

successful.      The   Rev.  George   Phillips,  of   Setauket, 

joined  with  them,  and  the  Presbytery  was  organized. 

On  the  other  hand,  the  Rev.  Mr.  Henry  died  within 

*  Eecords  of  Presbyterian  Church,  p.  45. 


56  HISTORY  OF   THE  NEW  SCHOOL. 

the  year  and  the  Snowhill  Presbytery  was  merged  in 
that  of  New  Castle. 

At  this  time,  questions  had  arisen  in  the  Irish  Church, 
which  were  destined  to  have  an  important  bearing  upon 
the  interests  of  the  infant  Church  in  America. 

We  have  seen  the  development,  among  the  English 
Presbyterians,  of  a  tendency  to  lax  theology,  spreading 
its  contagion  from  the  Continent,  about  the  beginning 
of  the  eighteenth  century.  In  the  Irish  Church,  the 
adoption  of  the  Westminster  standards,  by  intrants  into 
the  ministry,  had  been  universally  customary,  but  the 
old  book  of  Minutes  having  been  lost,  there  was  no 
recorded  regulation  on  the  subject,  until  1698,  when  it 
was  made  a  rule,  by  unanimous  vote  of  the  General 
Synod  of  Ulster,  that  no  young  man  be  licensed  to 
preach  the  Gospel,  till  "he  subscribe  the  Confession 
of  Faith,  in  all  the  articles  thereof,  as  the  confession  of 
his  faith.^^*  ; 

For  some  years,  this  rule  continued  to  be  observed, 
without  question  or  hesitation.  But,  in  1705,  the 
Belfast  Society  was  formed,  consisting  of  a  number  of 
talented  young  ministers  and  others,  all  of  whom  were 
more  or  less  tainted  with  the  "  liberaP^  spirit  of  the  age. 

"  In  this  society  were  first  promulgated  many  opin- 
ions, hitherto  new  in  Ireland,  which,  being  at  variance 
with  both  the  doctrine  and  constitution  of  the  Presby- 
terian Church,  naturally  excited,  so  soon  as  they  became 
known,  much  attention ;  and  gradually  created  no  little 
disaffection  and  alarm.  The  opinions  did  not  directly 
impugn  any  of  the  leading  doctrines  of  the  Gospel,  as 
embodied   in  the   Church's   Confession  of  Faith;   but 

*  Eeid,  vol.  iii.,  p.  12. 


THE   ADOPTING   ACT.  57 

they  tended  to  undermine  the  entire  system  of  a  sin- 
ner's acceptance,  as  taught  therein ;  by  placing  that 
acceptance,  mainly,  on  sincerity ;  by  inculcating  the  in- 
nocency  of  error,  when  not  willful ;  and  by  undervahiing 
all  belief  in  positive  doctrines,  as  uncertain,  or,  at  all 
events,  as  non-essential.  In  reference  to  ecclesiastical  dis- 
cipline, the  members  of  the  society  taught,  among  other 
things,  that  the  Church  had  no  right  to  require  candi- 
dates for  the  ministry  to  subscribe  a  confession  of  faith, 
prepared  by  any  man  or  body  of  men  ;  and  that  such  a 
required  subscription  was  a  violation  of  the  right  of 
private  judgment,  and  inconsistent  with  Christian 
liberty  and  true  Protestantism/^* 

Most  of  these  opinions  were  already  prevalent  in  the 
Presbyterian  churches  of  Switzerland ;  and  became  the 
precursors  of  the  Socinian  apostasy  of  these  churches. 
In  England,  the  writings  of  Whiston,  Clarke  and  Hoad- 
ley,  and  the  discussions  at  Salters'  Hall,  were  preparing 
the  way,  by  the  prevalence  of  these  sentiments,  for  the 
extensive  dissemination  of  Arian  and  Socinian  doctrines, 
both  in  the  Establishment,  and  among  the  Presbyterians. 
And,  in  Scotland,  the  proceedings  against  the  Pev. 
John  Simpson,  professor  of  divinity  in  the  university 
of  Glasgow,  for  teaching  Arminian  and  Pelagian  errors ; 
and  the  culpable  lenity  exercised  toward  him,  announced 
the  beginning  of  the  reign  of  Moderatism,  in  that  once 
glorious  Church.  That  trial  was  terminated  in  the 
Scotch  Assembly  of  1717. 

The  agitation  caused  in  Ireland  by  the  debates  and 
publications  of  the  Belfast  Society,  brought  the  subject 
to  the  notice  of  the  General  Synod,  in  1720.     By  it,  a 

*  Reid,  iii.,  158. 


58  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

paper  was  adopted,  which  is  known  as  the  Pacific  Act. 
This  Act  bestowed  elaborate  eulogies  upon  the  Confes- 
sion, and  reproved  any  who  might  have  disparaged  it. 
Then,  citing  an  act  of  the  General  Synod,  in  the  year 
1705,  which  required  simple  subscription  to  the  Con- 
fession,— it  declared  that  this  act  was  ^^  thus  to  be 
understood,  as  now  is  practised  by  the  Presbyteries, — 
that  if  any  person,  called  upon  to  subscribe,  shall  scru- 
ple any  phrase  or  phrases  in  the  Confession,  he  shall 
have  leave  to  use  his  own  expressions ;  which  the  Pres- 
bytery shall  accept  of,  providing  they  judge  such  a 
person  sound  in  the  faith,  and  that  such  expressions  are 
consistent  with  the  substance  of  the  doctrine;  and  that 
such  explications  shall  be  inserted  in  the  Presbytery 
books."  * 

This  compromising  expedient  was  the  beginning  of  a 
bitter  controversy,  continued  for  six  years,  between  sub- 
scribers and  non-subscribers ;  many  of  whom  refused  to 
assent  to  any  profession  of  faith  whatever,  unless  couched 
in  the  very  words  of  Scripture.  At  length,  the  General 
Synod,  in  1726,  excluded  the  non-subscribers  from  its 
communion.  "  The  instructive  experiment  which  was 
now  tried  of  a  non-declaring  church  ended  in  Inde- 
pendency, real  or  virtual,  and  what  was  much  more 
deplorable,  in  Unitarianism.  And,  just  in  proportion 
as  certain  Presbyteries  of  the  Synod  relapsed  into  non- 
subscription,  the  same  doctrinal  errors  prevailed  in 
them ;  until,  at  the  distance  of  a  century,  this  state  of 
things  led  to  another  separation,"t  in  1828,  resulting 
from  extensive  Socinian  defection,  anew  developed,  in 
the  Synod. 

*  Eeid,  iii.,  171.  f  Keid,  iii.,  248. 


THE  ADOPTING   ACT.  59 

The  protracted  agitation  in  Ireland  could  not  but 
arrest  the  attention  and  aifect  the  policy  of  the  Church 
dn  America.  The  movement,  here,  for  subscription  to 
the  Westminster  standards,  originated  with  the  Presby- 
tery of  New  Castle.  Several  of  the  ablest  members  of 
the  Synod  were  natives  of  Ireland,  connected  with  that 
Presbytery.  One  of  these,  Thomas  Craighead,  was 
brother  to  Robert  Craighead,  moderator  of  the  General 
Synod  of  Ulster,  in  1719.  Whilst  the  subscription 
controversy  was  at  its  height,  in  Ireland,  that  Presby- 
tery, in  1724,  entered  on  their  records  a  formula,  which 
their  candidates  for  licensure  were  required  to  sign  : — 
"  I  do  own  the  Westminster  Confession  as  the  confession 
of  my  faith."  What  may  have  been  the  course  of  the 
other  Presbyteries,  on  this  subject,  is  unknown;  as  their 
records  are  lost. 

Originally,  as  we  have  seen,  the  General  Presbytery 
was  composed  almost  wholly  of  Scotch-Irish  ministers 
and  people.  But,  after  the  distribution  of  its  members 
into  local  Presbyteries,  considerable  accessions  were 
received,  particularly  in  New  Jersey,  and  on  Long 
Island,  of  congregations  of  English,  Welsh,  and  New 
England  people ;  and  of  ministers  from  New  England 
and  Wales.  The  connection  of  these  ministers  and 
churches,  comparatively  ignorant,  as  they  were,  of 
usages  and  questions  which  were  familiar  to  the  other 
members,  rendered  the  matter  of  subscription  much 
more  delicate  than,  otherwise,  it  would  have  been. 

In  1726,  the  Irish  Synod  excluded  the  non-subscribers. 
In  1727,  the  Rev.  John  Thomson,  an  Irish  member  of 
New  Castle  Presbytery,  brought  to  Synod  an  overture, 
for  the  adoption  of  the  Confession  by  the  body :  "  We 


60  HLSTOKY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

are  now  likely  to  fall  into  a  great  difference/^  says  An- 
drews, (April,  1729,)  ^^ about  subscribing  the  Westminster 
Confession  of  Faith.  An  overture  for  it,  drawn  up  by 
Mr.  Thomson,  of  Lewestown,  was  offered  to  our  Synod, 
the  year  before  last;  but  not  then  read  in  the  Synod. 
Measures  were  taken  to  stave  it  off;  and  I  was  in  hopes  we 
should  have  heard  no  more  of  it.  But,  last  year,  it  was 
brought  again,  recommended  by  all  the  Scotch  and  Irish 
members  present;  and,  being  read  among  us,  a  proposal 
was  made,  prosecuted  and  agreed  to,  that  it  should  be  de- 
ferred till  our  next  meeting,  for  further  consideration. 
The  proposal  is,  that  all  ministers  and  intrants  should 
sign  it,  or  be  disowned  as  members.  Now,  shall  we  do 
it?  They  will  certainly  carry  it,  by  numbers.  Our 
countrymen  say,  they  are  willing  to  join  in  a  vote  to 
make  it  the  Confession  of  our  Church  ;  but  to  agree  to 
making  it  a  test  of  orthodoxy  and  term  of  ministerial 
communion,  they  will  not.  I  think  all  the  Scotch  are 
on  one  side,  and  all  the  English  and  Welsh  on  the 
other,  to  a  man."  *  In  the  interval  between  the  Synods 
of  1728  and  1729,  the  overture  was  printed,t  and 
"  Remarks"  upon  it  were  published  by  Dickinson. J 

Thomson,  in  the  appendix  to  his  work  on  the  Gov- 
ernment of  the  Church,  published  in  1740,  states  the 
motives  which  actuated  him  in  this  affair : — "  When  it 
pleased  our  glorious  and  almighty  King,  Jesus,  who  has 
the  hearts  of  the  kings  of  the  earth  in  his  hands,  that, 
as  the  rivers  of  waters  are  turned,  he  can  turn  them 
whithersoever  he  pleaseth,  to  move  the  hearts  of  our 

*  Letter  to  Colraan  in  Hodge's  History,  p.  168. 

t  See  the  Overture,  in  Hodge,  p.  162,  and  Assembly's  Digest,  p.  28. 

t  Webster,  p.  106. 


THE   ADOPTING   ACT.  61 

Synod,  with  such  a  remarkable  unanimity,  to  adopt  the 
Westminster^.  Confession  and  Catechism,  etc.,  it  was 
matter  of  very  great  satisfaction  to  most  of  us,  and  to 
myself  in  particular,  who  had  been,  for  some  time 
before,  under  no  small  fears  and  perplexities  of  mind, 
lest  we  should  be  corrupted  with  the  new  schemes  of 
doctrine,  which,  for  some  time,  had  prevailed  in  the 
north  of  Ireland ;  that  being  the  part  from  whence  we 
expected  to  be,  in  a  great  measure,  supplied  with  new 
hands,  to  fill  our  vacancies  in  the  ministry,  within  the 


* 


\ 


bounds  of  our  Synod." 

In  the  overture,  Thomson  represents  the  Church  as 
"  too  much  like  the  people  of  Laish,  in  a  careless,  de- 
fenceless condition,  as  a  city  without  walls./  (Or  perhaps 
my  unacquaintedness  with  our  records  may  cause  me 
to  mistake.)  For,  as  far  as  I  know^,  though  we  be  an 
entire  particular  Church,  and  not  a  part  of  a  particu- 
lar Church,  yet  we  have  not  any  particular  system  of 
doctrines,  composed  by  ourselves  or  others,  which  we, 
by  any  judicial  act  of  our  Church,  have  adopted  to  be 
the  articles  or  confession  of  our  faith,  etc.  Now,  a 
church  Avithout  a  confession,  what  is  it  like?  It  is 
true,  as  I  take  it,  we  all  generally  acknowledge  and 
look  upon  the  Westminster  Confession  and  Catechisms 
to  be  our  confession,  or  what  we  own  for  such.  But 
the  most  that  can  be  said  is,  that  the  Westminster  Con- 
fession of  Faith  is  the  confession  of  the  faith  of  the 
generality  of  our  members,  ministers,  and  people.  But, 
that  it  is  our  confession,  as  we  are  a  united  body  politic, 
I  cannot  see ;  unless.  First,  it  hath  been  received  by  a 
conjunct  act  of  the  representatives  of  our  Church ;   I 

*  Thomson's  Government  of  the  Church  of  Christ,  p.  116. 
6 


62  HISTORY   OF   THE    NEW   SCHOOL. 

mean,  by  the  Synod,  either  before  or  since  it  hath  been 
suh  formd  synodi  ;*  Secondly,  unless  due  care  be,  and 
hath  been  taken  that  all  intrants  into  the  ministry 
among  us  have  subscribed  the  said  Confession,  or,  by 
some  equivalent  solemn  act,  coram  audoritate  ecdesias- 
tioaj'f  testified  the  owning  it  as  the  confession  of  their 
faith ;  which,  how  far  it  is  observed  within  the  bounds 
of  our  Synod,  I  am  ignorant.  Now,  if  this  be  so,  (for 
upon  this  supposition  I  speak,)  I  think  we  are  in  a  very 
defenceless  condition.  For,  if  we  have  no  Confession, 
which  is  ours  by  synodical  act ;  or,  if  any  among  us 
have  not  subscribed  or  acknowledged  the  Confession, 
ut  supra,X  then.  First,  There  is  no  bar  provided  to 
keep  out  of  the  ministry  those  who  are  corrupt  in  doc- 
trinals ;  they  may  be  received  into  the  ministry,  with- 
out renouncing  their  corrupt  doctrines.  Secondly, 
Those  that  are  in  the  ministry  among  us  may  propa- 
gate gross  errors,  and  corrupt  many  thereby ;  without 
being  discovered  to  preach  anything  against  the  received 
truth,  because,  supposito  ut  supra,^  the  truth  never  was 
publicly  received  among  us." 

He  urges  the  danger  resulting  from  the  fact  that 
"  Arminianism,  Socinianism,  Deism,  Free-thinking,  etc., 
do,  like  a  deluge,  overflow  even  the  Reformed  churches, 
both  established  and  dissenting ;"  and  that  the  poverty 
of  the  Synod  forbade  its  being  able  to  plant  a  semi- 
nary, for  the  education  of  its  own  candidates ;  so  that 
she  must  depend  on  other  places  for  men  to  fill  the 
vacancies ;  "  and  so  are  in  danger  of  having  our  minis- 

*  In  the  form  of  a  Synod. 

■}  In  the  presence  of  ecclesiastical  authority, 

X  As  above.  g  Upon  the  above  supposition. 


THE   ADOPTING   ACT.  63 

try  corrupted,  by  such  as  are  leavened  with  false  doc- 
trine before  they  come  among  us." 

"  Fourthly,  I  am  afraid  there  are  too  many  among 
ourselves,  who,  though  they  may  be  sound  in  the  faith, 
themselves,  yet  have  the  edge  of  their  zeal,  against  the 
prevailing  errors  of  the  limes,  very  much  blunted ; 
partly,  by  their  being  dispirited,  and  so,  by  a  kind  of 
cowardice,  are  afraid,  boldly,  openly,  and  zealously,  to 
appear  against  those  errors  that  show  themselves  in  the 
world,  under  the  patronage  and  protection  of  so  many 
persons  of  note  and  figure ;  partly,  by  a  kind  of  indif- 
ference and  mistaken  charity,  whereby  they  think  they 
ought  to  bear  with  others,  though  differing  from  them 
in  opinion,  about  points  which  are  mysterious  and 
sublime,  but  not  practical  nor'  fundamental,  such  as 
predestination.  Now,  although  I  would  grant,  that 
the  precise  point  of  election  and  reprobation  be  neither 
fundamental  nor  immediately  practical ;  yet,  take  pre- 
destination completely,  as  it  takes  in  the  other  disputed 
points  between  Calvinists  and  Arminians,  such  as  uni- 
versal grace,  the  non-perseverance  of  the  saints,  fore- 
seen faith  and  good  works,  etc.,  and  I  think  it  such  an 
article  in  my  creed,  such  a  fundamental  of  my  faith, 
that  I  know  not  what  any  other  articles  would  avail, 
that  could  be  retained  without  it." 

For  these  reasons,  he  urges  that  "  the  Synod  would, 
by  an  act  of  its  own,  publicly  and  authoritatively, 
adopt  the  Westminster  Confession  of  Faitli,  Catechisms, 
etc.,  for  the  public  confession  of  our  faith,  as  we  are  a 
particular  organized  Church."  That  it  would  "make 
an  act  to  oblige  every  Presbytery  within  our  bounds, 
to  oblige  every  candidate  for  the  ministry,  to  subscribe 


64  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

or  otherwise  acknowledge,  coram  presbyterio*  the  said 
Confession  of  Faith,  etc.,  and  to  promise  not  to  preach 
or  teach  contrary  to  it  :'^ — "  To  oblige  every  actual  min- 
ister coming  among  us  to  do  the  like  :" — and  "  to  enact, 
that,  if  any  minister  within  our  bounds  shall  take  upon 
him  to  teach  or  preach  anything  contrary  to  any  of  said 
articles, — unless,  first  he  propose  the  said  point  to  the 
Presbytery  or  Synod,  to  be  by  them  discussed, — he 
shall  be  censured,  so  and  so.'' 

In  this  paper,  the  suggestion  that  some  members  of 
the  Synod  were  suspected  of  timidity  and  time-serving, 
with  regard  to  unpopular  doctrines,  was  naturally  cal- 
culated to  excite  anxiety  as  to  the  design  of  the  move- 
ment. There  was,  however,  another  intimation  even 
more  alarming.  The  overture  urges  "  that  secret-bosom 
enemies  of  the  truth,  (I  mean  those  who,  being  visible 
members  of  a  church,  do  not  openly  and  violently  op- 
pose the  truth  professed  therein ;  but,  in  a  secret  covert 
way,  endeavor  to  undermine  it,)  are  as  dangerous  as  any 
whatever;  and,  therefore,  the  Church  should  exercise 
her  vigilance,  in  a  special  manner,  against  such ;  by 
searching  them  out,  discovering  them,  and  setting  a 
mark  upon  them,  whereby  they  may  be  known,  and  so 
not  have  it  in  their  power  to  deceive." 

This  language,  which  persons  familiar  with  the 
Ulster  discussions,  would  at  once  recognize  as  being 
suggested  by  the  aspects  of  that  controversy,  was,  by 
the  "  English  and  Welsh"  members  of  the  Synod,  sus- 
pected to  be  indicative  of  designs  hostile  to  them.  The 
*'  Scotch"  being  settled  principally  in  Pennsylvania  and 
southward,  whilst  the  others  were  generally  located  in 

*  Before  the  Presbytery. 


THE   ADOPTING   ACT.  65 

New  York  and  New  Jersey, — tlieir  intercourse  was 
comparatively  limited,  and  their  personal  knowledge  of 
each  other  not  sufficient  to  constitute  a  basis  of  perfect 
mutual  confidence,  in  the  presence  of  such  issues  as  were 
here  presented.  What  peculiar  interpretations  may  not 
these  Scotch  brethren  put  upon  the  Confession?  Is 
not  the  purpose  to  use  the  adoption  of  it  as  a  means  of 
enforcing  upon  the  Synod  whatever  peculiar  views  they 
may  hold  on  points  of  no  significance?  Or,  is  the 
design  to  enforce  the  ipsissima  verha^^  the  minutest 
2)hraseology,  of  the  Confession,  in  all  things,  on  the 
consciences  of  members,  and  thus  exclude  those  who 
cannot  so  receive  it  ?  "  Some,"  says  Andrews^,  "  say  the 
design  of  this  motion  is,  to  spew  out  our  countrymen ; 
they  being  scarce  able  to  hold  way  with  the  other 
brethren  in  all  their  disciplinary  and  legislative  notions. 
What  truth  there  may  be  in  this,  I  know  not.  Some 
deny  it;  whereas  others  say  there  is  something  in  it. 
I  am  satisfied,  some  of  us  are  an  uneasiness  to  them ; 
and  are  thought  to  be  too  much  in  their  way,  some- 
times ;  so  that,  I  think,  it  would  be  no  trouble  to  lose 
some  of  us.  Yet,  I  can't  think  this  to  be  the  thing 
ultimately  designed ;  whatever  smaller  glances  there 
may  be  at  it.^f 

Andrews  does  not  seem  to  imagine  the  possibility, 
even,  of  any  doctrinal  difference.  All  he  is  afraid  of 
is,  that  some  of  the  others  may  not  be  able  to  come  up 
to  the  requirements  of  the  Scotch  and  Irish,  in  "  their 
disciplinary  and  legislative  notions."  And  these,  pre- 
cisely, are  the  points  that  were  guarded,  in  the  proceed- 
ings connected  with  the  Adopting  Act. 

*  The  very  words.  f  Letter  to  Colman,  in  flodge,  p.  168. 

6  * 


QQ  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

Dickinson^  in  his  "  Remarks"  upon  the  overture, 
insisted  that  Laish  will  not  be  bettered  by  the  wall  of 
subscription ;  that  her  true  defence  consists  in  a  thorough 
examination  of  candidates  on  the  work  of  grace  in  their 
hearts ;  in  reviving  discipline,  bringing  oiFenders  to 
account,  and  being  diligent  in  preaching  the  whole 
counsel  of  God.  He  urges,  that  the  Synod  had  already 
a  bond  of  union,  in  the  general  acknowledgment  of  the 
truth ;  and  that  the  enforcing  of  subscription  is  the 
fruitful  cause  of  controversy  and  division.  "  Subscrip- 
tion, therefore,  is  not  necessary  to  the  being  or  the  well- 
being  of  a  church ;  unless  hatred,  variance,  emulation, 
wrath,  strife,  sedition  and  heresies  are  necessary  to  that 
end."* 

This  would  seem  to  have  been  a  hasty  and  incon- 
siderate publication.  The  positions  therein  taken  can- 
not be  reconciled  with  Dickinson's  subsequent  action, 
and  are  impliedly  repudiated,  in  publications  afterward 
issued  by  him.  At  the  erection  of  the  Synod  of  New 
York,  he  and  his  brethren  made  subscription  a  term  of 
union  with  the  New  Brunswick  brethren.  His  attitude, 
at  this  time,  is  not,  however,  to  be  confounded  with  that 
of  the  non-subscribers  of  Ulster.  They  utterly  refused 
to  subscribe  to  any  human  formula  of  faith ;  as  being 
a  violation  of  the  rights  of  conscience.  The  objections 
of  Dickinson  were  grounded  in  expediency.  To  his 
Kemarks,  no  reply  seems  to  have  been  made.  In  fact, 
the  majority  of  the  Synod  acted  with  great  moderation 
and  forbearance.  Whilst,  confessedly,  an  overwhelm- 
ing majority  were  in  favor  of  the  overture, — they  not 
only   consented   to    waive   its    introduction,   when   first 

*  Webster,  pp.  106,  107. 


THE   A]:)OPTING   ACT.  67 

brought  to  the  Synod,  but,  the  next  year,  unanimously 
agreed  to  postpone  the  decision  for  a  twelvemonth 
longer, — thus  allowing  two  full  years  for  consideration, 
before  final  action.  This  fact,  of  itself,  must  have  con- 
vinced the  other  brethren,  upon  reflection,  that  no  secret 
designs  were  cherished,  and  no  extreme  policy  con- 
templated. 

The  minutes  of  1728  record  that  "there  being  an 
overture  presented  to  the  Synod,  in  writing,  having 
reference  to  the  subscribing  of  the  Confession  of  Faith, 
etc.,  the  Synod,  judging  this  to  be  a  very  important 
affair,  unanimously  concluded  to  defer  the  consideration 
of  it  till  the  next  Synod ;  withal  recommending  it  to 
the  members  of  each  Presbytery  present  to  give  timeous 
notice  to  the  absent  members ;  and  it  is  agreed,  that  the 
next  be  a  full  Synod."*  The  meetings  were  sometimes 
by  delegation. 

When  the  Synod  met,  in  1729,  although  the  attend- 
ance w^as  comparatively  large,  Morgan,  Pemberton, 
Webb,  and  Pumry,  all  of  them  New  England  men, 
were  absent,  a  fact,  which,  of  itself,  seems  to  indicate 
that  the  delay,  and  consequent  opportunity  for  infor- 
mation and  mutual  understanding,  had  induced  the 
quieting  of  apprehensions,  and  a  restoration  of  con- 
fidence. 

Messrs.  Andrews,  Dickinson,  Thomson,  Pierson, 
Craighead,  Conn,  Budd,  and  the  moderator,  Anderson, 
were  appointed  "  a  committee  for  the  fund,  or  any  other 
business  that  the  Synod  shall  recommend  unto  them.^' 

"  Ordered  that  the  committee  for  the  fund  meet  at 
three  o'clock,  P.  M.,  together  with  the  commissioner  of 

*  Kecords,  p.  91. 


6S  HISTORY   OF   THE    NEW   SCHOOL. 

the  Synod.  Masters  Andrews,  Cross,  Dickinson,  Pier- 
son,  Craighead  and  Gillespie  were  appointed  to  be  the 
Commissioners  of  the  Synod  for  the  ensuing  year.  The 
affair  relating  to  the  Confession,  under  our  consideration, 
since  our  last,  is  referred  to,  the  committee,  to  draw  up 
an  overture  on  it."  * 

The  engagement  of  the  committee  with  the  Commis- 
sioner of  Synod  did  not  prevent  their  being  prepared  to 
rejDort  at  the  opening  of  the  sessions,  next  morning,  a 
paper  which  received  the  unanimous  approval  of  the 
body.     "  It  was  agreed  to,  m  hwc  verba. f 

"  Although  the  Synod  do  not  claim  or  pretend  to  any 
authority  of  imposing  our  faith  upon  other  men's  con- 
sciences, but  do  profess  our  just  dissatisfaction  with,  and 
abhorrence  of  such  impositions,  and  do  utterly  disclaim 
all  legislative  power  and  authority  in  the  Church,  being 
willing  to  receive  one  another  as  Christ  has  received  us, 
to  the  glory  of  God,  and  admit  to  felloAvship  in  sacred 
ordinances,  all  such  as  we  have  grounds  to  believe  Christ 
will  at  last  admit  to  the  kingdom  of  heaven,  yet  we  are 
undoubtedly  obliged  to  take  care  that  the  faith  once  de- 
livered to  the  saints  be  kept  ipure  and  uncorrupt  among 
us,  and  handed  down  to  our  posterity ;  and  do,  there- 
fore, agree  that  all  the  ministers  of  this  Synod,  or  that 
shall  hereafter  be  admitted  into  this  Synod,  sjiall  declare 
their  agreement  in,  and  approbation  of,  the  Confession 
of  Faith,  Avith  the  Larger  and  Shorter  Catechisms  of 
the  Assembly  of  Divines  at  AYestminster,  as  being,  in 
all  the  essential  and  necessary  articles,  good  forms  of 
sound  words,  and  systems  of  Christian  doctrine,  and 
do  also  ado])t  the  said  Confession  and  Catechisms  as  the 
*  Kecord?,  p.  93.  f  In  these  words. 


^  THE   ADOPTING   ACT.  69 

confession  of  our  faith.  And  we  do  also  agree,  that  all 
the  Presbyteries  within  our  bounds  shall  always  take 
care  not  to  admit  any  candidate  of  the  ministry  into 
the  exercise  of  the  sacred  function,  but  what  declares 
his  agreement  in  opinion  with  all  the  essential  and 
necessary  articles  of  said  Confession,  either  by  subscrib- 
ing the  said  Confession  of  Faith  and  Catechisms,  or  by 
a  verbal  declaration  of  their  assent  thereto ;  as  such 
minister  or  candidate  shall  think  best.  And,  in  case 
any  minister  of  this  Synod,  or  any  candidate  for  the 
ministry,  shall  have  any  scruple  with  respect  to  any 
article  or  articles  of  said  Confession  or  Catechisms,  he 
shall,  at  the  time  of  his  making  said  declaration,  declare 
his  sentiments  to  the  Presbytery  or  Synod  ;  who  shall, 
notwithstanding,  admit  him  to  the  exercise  of  the  min- 
istry within  our  bounds,  and  to  ministerial  communion, 
if  the  Synod  or  Presbytery  shall  judge  his  scruple  or 
mistake  to  be  onlv  about  articles  not  essential  and  neces- 
sary,  in  doctrine,  worship,  or  government.  But  if  the 
Synod  or  Presbytery  shall  judge  such  ministers  or  can- 
didates erroneous  in  essential  and  necessarv  articles  of 
faith,  the  Synod  or  Presbytery  shall  declare  them  uncapa- 
ble  of  communion  with  them.  And  the  Synod  do  solemnly 
agree,  that  none  of  us  will  traduce,  or  use  any  oppro- 
brious terms,  of  those  that  differ  from  us,  in  these  extra- 
essential  and  not-necessary  points  of  doctrine ;  but  treat 
them  with  the  same  friendsliip,  kindness,  and  brotherly 
love,  as  if  they  had  not  differed  from  us  in  such  senti- 
ments.'' * 

This  paper  was  adopted,  says  the  record,  "  after  long 
debating.''     The  entire  discussion,  however,  was  closed 

*  Eecords,  p.  94. 


70  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

and  the  paper  passed  during  the  morning  session,  be- 
tween nine  and  the  midday  adjournment. 

The  above  ]3aper  is,  on  the  records  of  the  Synod, 
designated  as  its  First,  or  Preliminary  Act."*  In  the 
afternoon  was  enacted  the  Adopting  Act. 

"  All  the  ministers  of  this  Synod  now  present,  except 
one,  that  declared  himself  not  prepared,  viz. :  Masters 
Jedidiah  Andrews,  Thomas  Craighead,  John  Thomson, 
James  Anderson,  John  Pierson,  Samuel  Gelston,  Joseph 
Houston,  Gilbert  Tennent,  Adam  Boyd,  Jonathan  Dick- 
inson, John  Bradner,  Alexander  Hutchinson,  Thomas 
Evans,  Hugh  Stevenson,  William  Tennent,  Hugh  Conn, 
George  Gillespie,  and  John  Wilson,  after  proposing  all 
the  scruples  that  any  of  them  had  to  make,  agaiust  any 
articles  and  expressions  in  the  Confession  of  Faith  and 
Larger  and  Shorter  Catechisms  of  the  Assembly  of  Di- 
vines at  Westminster,  have  unanimously  agreed  in  the 
solution  of  those  scruples,  and  in  declaring  the  said 
Confession  and  Catechisms  to  be  the  confession  of  their 
faith:  excepting,  only,  some  clauses  in  the  twentieth 
and  twenty-third  chapters ;  concerning  Avhich  clauses, 
the  Synod  do  unanimously  declare,  that  they  do  not  re- 
ceive those  articles  in  any  such  sense  as  to  suppose  the 
civil  magistrate  hath  a  controlling  power  over  Synods, 
with  respect  to  the  exercise  of  their  ministerial  au- 
thority ;  or  power  to  persecute  any  for  their  religion ; 
or,  in  any  sense  contrary  to  the  Protestant  succession  to 
the  throne  of  Great  Britain." 

"  The  Synod,  observing  that  unanimity,  peace,  and 
unity,  Avhich  appeared  in  all  their  consultations  and  de- 
terminations relating  to  the  affair  of  the  Confession,  did 

*  Kecords,  p,  126. 


THE   ADOPTING   ACT.  71 

unanimously  agree  in  giving  thanks  to  Gocl,  in  solemn 
prayer  and  praises/'* 

Subsequently,  a  motion  being  made  to  know  the 
Synod's  judgment  about  the  Directory ;  they  gave  their 
sense  of  the  matter  in  the  following  words ;— viz. : 

^^  The  Synod  do  unanimously  acknowledge  and  de- 
clare that  they  judge  the  Directory  for  AYorship,  Disci- 
pline and  Government  of  the  Church,  commonly  annexed 
to  the  Westminster  Confession,  to  be  agreeable  in  sub- 
stance to  the  Word  of  God,  and  founded  thereupon; 
and  therefore  do  earnestly  recommend  the  same  to  all 
their  members,  to  be  by  them  observed,  as  near  as  cir- 
cumstances will  allow,  and  Christian  j^rudence  direct."  f 

Here,  a  significant  discrimination  is  observable. 
With  one  specific  exception,  the  Confession  and  Cate- 
chisms are  adopted  absolutely,  without  reservation,  as 
'^tlie  confession  of  their  faith."  But  respecting  the 
Directory,  they  speak  in  different  style.  It,  they  pro- 
nounce to  be  ^'agreeable,  in  substance,  to  the  Word  of 
God;"  and  therefore,  to  be  observed,  "as  near  as  cir- 
cumstances will  allow,  and  Christian  prudence  direct." 
The  meaning  of  this  we  shall  see,  hereafter.| 

*  Eecords,  p.  94.        f  Kecords,  p.  95.         J  See  beloAV,  p.  121. 


CHAPTER  IV. 

THE   PRELIMINARY   ACT. 

Diversity  of  opinions  respecting  the  Act — Principles  of  strict  and  libe- 
ral subscription — The  Act  was  no  compromise — Thomson  obtained 
just  what  he  asked — Dickinson  surrendered  the  only  point  he 
made — He  denied  the  power  of  making  laws — No  one  claimed  it — 
The  Preliminary  Act  unambiguous  on  some  points — Why  ambiguous 
on  others — It  was  cautionary,  till  a  mutual  understanding  could  be 
had — The  distinction  of  essential  and  non-essential  trufe  and  neces- 
sary— The  Adopting  Act  was  designed  to  be  strict — Force  of  the 
exception — Design  as  to  adoption  by  candidates — Adoption  in  the 
next  year's  Synod — Inquiry  as  to  compliance  of  Presbyteries. 

No  other  document  of  our  Church  has  elicited  more 
discussion,  as  to  its  meaning  and  intent,  than  has  the 
Preliminary,  commonly  called  the  Adopting  Act.  It 
has  been  represented  as  a  compromise, — as  ambiguous 
in  its  terms, — and  as  designed  to  admit  of  a  considerable 
latitude  of  doctrinal  sentiments  among  the  ministry  of 
the  Church.  Before  entering  upon  the  discussion  of 
these  points,  it  will  be  proper  to  ascertain,  if  possible, 
what  is  the  precise  question  at  issue,  between  the  advo- 
cates of  a  liberal,  and  of  a  strict,  adoption  of  the  Con- 
fession of  Faith. 

The  great  body  of  the  doctrines  of  the  Confession 
and  Catechisms,  constitute  a  logical  system,  the  seve- 
ral parts  of  which  are  so  related  to  each  other,  that 
72 


THE   PEELIMINARY   ACT.  73 

tliey  must  stand  or  fall  together.  The  question,  for 
example,  between  the  doctrine  of  the  utter  inability  of 
man  since  the  fall,  to  keep  the  law  of  God,  to  repent 
of  sin,  or  turn  to  God,  and  the  doctrine  that  he  has 
tJie  natural  ability,  but  wants  the  moral, — that  his  in- 
ability is  wholly  of  the  will,  and  that  men  could  turn 
to  God,  if  they  w^ould,  may  seem,  at  the  first  glance,  a 
very  trivial  matter.  Yet,  when  traced  out  to  its  ulti- 
mate consequences,  it  involves  almost  every  doctrine 
of  theology,  every  truth  of  the  Gospel.  The  one  view 
supposes  the  fall  and  ruin  of  the  whole  nature  of  man, 
in  Adam ;  and  it  implies  a  necessity  for  the  immediate 
and  omnipotent  agency  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  creating  the 
man  anew  in  Christ  Jesus.  This,  again,  implies  the 
union,  by  this  Spirit,  dwelling  in  them,  of  Christ  and 
the  believer.  Thus,  he,  then,  became  responsible  for 
his  people's  sins,  as  the  sins  of  his  own  body;  and 
standing,  in  this  light,  at  the  bar  of  justice,  he  was 
made  a  true  and  proper  vicarious  satisfaction  for  their 
sins,  and  wrought  for  them  a  perfect  righteousness. 
They,  on  the  other  hand, — by  virtue  of  this  same 
union  his  members, — are  robed  in  his  very  righteous- 
ness )  and,  in  it,  stand  justified  at  the  bar  of  God,  and 
admitted  to  the  adoption  of  sons,  by  virtue  of  oneness 
•svith  the  First-born.  In  every  direction,  w^e  might  thus 
trace  the  ramifications  of  this  system. 

The  other  view  implies  and  springs  from  the  notion, 
that  the  fall  was  not  a  depravation  of  man's  entire 
nature,  but  only  a  perversion  of  his  aifections  and  his 
will ;  whilst  his  understanding  and  conscience  are  un- 
impaired. It  involves  the  conclusion,  that  no  omnipo- 
tent transforming  agency  is  necessary,  in  order  to  the 
7 


74  HISTOKY   OF   THE   NEW  SCHOOL. 

restoration  of  man, — that  all  that  is  requisite  is,  that 
the  truth  be  brought  convincingly  before  the  mind,  so 
as  to  determine  the  will,  in  favor  of  the  claims  of 
God, — that  to  this  purpose,  the  Spirit  is  only  necessary 
as  an  enlightening  and  persuading  agent,  exercising  no 
transforming  new  creating  power,  nor  acting  immedi- 
ately on  the  heart,  but  only,  mediately,  through  the 
Word.  Thus,  the  spiritual  union  of  the  believer  and 
Christ  is  ignored  and  excluded,  his  vicarious  satisfac- 
tion is  thereupon  denied ;  the  doctrine  of  justification 
rejected ;  and  the  whole  gospel  scheme  overthrown. 
The  very  nature  and  holiness  of  God,  himself,  are  pre- 
sented in  a  false  and  distorted  light,  from  these  prem- 
ises ;  as,  his  is  conceived  to  be  a  justice  that  may  be 
set  aside,  and  a  mercy  that  strives  against  and  over- 
comes justice ;  for  sin  is  supposed  to  be  pardoned,  with- 
out satisfaction  to  the  law;  and  sinners  are  saved, 
although  the  records  of  justice  still  for  ever  exhibit  the 
uncanceled  charges  against  them. 

Such  are  the  logical  connections  of  these  several 
opinions  respecting  the  question  of  man's  inability  by 
nature.  And  these  diverse  consequences,  not  only  re- 
sult from  the  specific  positions  taken  upon  that  point, 
but  each  several  proposition,  in  these  two  schemes  im- 
plies and  logically  demands  all  the  others,  in  them 
respectively.  If  the  skillftil  naturalist  is  able,  from  a 
single  bone,  to  reconstruct  the  entire  animal  to  which 
it  belonged,  even  though,  before,  nondescript, — much 
more  certainly,  can  the  intelligent  theologian  from  any 
specific  proposition,  on  what  may  be  regarded,  popu- 
larly, as  the  minor  points  in  systematic  theology,  deter- 
mine the  system  to  which  it  belongs,  and  reconstruct 


THE   PRELIMINARY   ACT.  75 

the  entire  scheme.  Not  only  is  this  the  case ;  but,  it 
is  farther  true,  in  the  history  of  doctrine,  that  all  de- 
partures from  the  faith,  perhaps,  without  exception, 
have  originated  in  error  on  some  one  of  these  subordi- 
nate points.  Men  do  not,  at  once,  apostatize  from  the 
great  cardinal  truths  of  the  Gospel,  until,  first,  their 
faith  has  been  perverted  and  the  foundations  removed, 
by  error  cherished  on  some  of  the  subordinate  related 
truths. 

It  is  in  view  of  these  facts  and  principles  that  their 
position  is  taken,  by  those  who  advocate  the  enforcing 
of  a  strict  adoption  of  the  Confession  of  Faith,  by  the 
ministry  of  the  Church.  They  do  not  mean  to  assert, 
that  everj'thing  contained  in  the  Confession  is  infalli- 
bly true.  The  question,  for  example,  whether  the  pro- 
duction of  the  universe  out  of  nothing,  took  place 
within  the  six  natural  days  of  the  Mosaic  record, — the 
question  of  the  marriage  of  a  deceased  wife's  sister, — 
such  as  these,  are  questions,  simply,  of  biblical  inter- 
pretation, as  to  points  of  history  and  law,  the  decision 
of  which,  however  made,  aflPects  in  no  wise,  any  one 
doctrine  of  the  sytem  of  revealed  and  saving  truth ; 
whether  as  to  the  nature  of  God  or  of  man,  the  nature 
and  demerit  of  sin,  or  the  plan  of  salvation.  Some 
errors,  therefore,  on  such  points  may  be  tolerated  with- 
out danger  to  the  Gospel. 

Strict  subscribers,  further,  do  not  mean  to  assert  that 
the  language  of  the  Confession  is,  in  all  cases,  unques- 
tionably the  best  that  could  be  selected,  to  state  the 
scriptural  truth,  on  the  subjects  presented.  This  idea 
is  precluded  by  the  fact  that  the  same  doctrines  are 
stated  in  the  Constitution,  in  three  several  forms, — in 


76  HISTORY   OF    THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

the  Confession  and  the  two  Catechisms ; — to  which  the 
Westminster  Assembly,  and  the  Scotch  Church  added  a 
fourth,  in  "The  Sum  of  Saving  Knowledge,"  which 
they  appended  to  the  other  standards. 

But  the  position  taken  by  those  who  insist  upon  a 
strict  adoption  of  the  Confession  is,  that,  whilst  due 
allowance  is  made  for  the  imperfection  of  man,  which 
attaches  to  all  he  does,  yet  the  doctrines,  all  of  them, 
of  the  connected  system  set  forth  in  the  Confession-,  are 
the  very  and  infallible  truth  of  God,  and  gosj^el  of 
salvation.  In  this  view,  they  comprehend,  not  only 
the  confessedly  great  truths,  but  those  of  minor  con- 
sideration; as  divinely  revealed,  necessary  to  the  others, 
and  parts  of  the  system ;  which,  without  them,  must 
fall  to  pieces.  Besides  these,  another  consideration 
enters  into  the  position  thus  stated.  When  the  Church 
shall  have  been  supplied  with  a  ministry,  who  have 
been  admitted  on  the  ground  of  permitting  some  unim- 
portant departures  from  the  system  of  the  standards, 
these  will  be  bound,  in  consistency,  to  admit  others, 
whose  position  is  a  little  farther  removed  than  their 
own.  Otherwise,  they  set  up  their  own  schemes,  as 
more  sacred  and  binding  than  that  of  the  Confession 
itself;  as  they  claim  for  themselves  the  right  to  go 
beyond  the  bounds  set  by  it.  The  second  generation 
would  therefore  depart  a  little  farther  than  the  first ; 
and  so  on,  until  utter  apostasy  is  the  inevitable  result ; 
as  is  demonstrated,  by  too  many  lamentable  instances. 

Thus,  the  position  of  those  who  require  strict  adop- 
tion, is  easily  ascertained  and  defined.  Those,  on  the 
contrary,  who  insist  upon  more  liberal  terms — rejecting 
the  standard  given  in  the  Confession,  are  set  afloat, 


THE   PRELIMINAEY  ACT.  77 

without  the  possibility  of  defining,  or  taking,  any  speci- 
fic position,  as  to  the  extent  to  which  divergence  is  to 
be  allowed.  Whilst  some  would  resist  any  very  serious 
departure,  others  would  claim  the  right  to  reject  every- 
thing, but  "  the  great  doctrines."  Of  this,  we  shall 
have,  in  the  subsequent  history,  abundant  illustrations. 
We  return  to  the  consideration  of  the  Preliminary 
Act.  Was  the  paper  a  compromise  ?  If,  by  this  word, 
it  is  intended  that  the  language  was  carefully  weighed 
and  guarded,  so  as  to  avoid  just  objections  from  those 
who  hesitated  upon  the  measure,  it  is  readily  conceded. 
But  if,  by  compromise,  it  be  meant  that,  in  deference  to 
opposing  sentiments,  the  supporters  of  Thomson's  over- 
ture waived  any  of  their  claims,  or  accepted,  or  were 
suj^posed  to  accept,  less  than  was  asked  in  that  paper, 
we  see  not  a  shadow  of  ground  for  the  assumption. 
What  was  the  question  at  issue  between  the  author  and 
opposers  of  the  overture?  Thomson^s  proposal  was 
that  the  Confession  be  adopted  as  the  confession  of  faith 
of  the  Church ;  and  that  if  any  minister  take  upon  him 
to  teach  or  preach  anything  contrary  to  any  of  its  arti- 
cles," im/ess  j/?r6'^  he  propose  the  said  points  to  the  Presby- 
tery  or  Synod  to  be  by  them  discussed,''  he  shall  be  cen- 
sured. Here,  evidently,  it  was  distinctly  contemplated, 
that  more  or  less  diversity  of  sentiment  must  be 
expected  to  exist,  upon  some  points,  among  those  who 
could  cordially  unite  in  the  adoption  of  the  Confession. 
It  is  assumed  that  disagreement  Avith  that  standard, 
within  certain  limits,  was  allowable;  whilst  greater 
departures  would  be  censurable;  and  the  extent  of 
allowable  departure  was  left,  as  yet,  undefined.  Fur- 
ther, the  Presbytery  and  Synod  are  designated,  to  the 
7  * 


78  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

exclusion  of  individual  private  judgment,  as  entitled, 
first,  to  determine  that  question,  in  each  case,  as  it 
should  arise.  Such  was  the  whole  extent  of  the  demand 
of  the  Scotch  members;  in  precise  accordance  with  what 
we  have  above  stated,  as  to  the  difference  between  ques- 
tions of  systematic  theology  and  those  statements  of  the 
Confession  which  relate  to  history,  law,  ethics,  and 
order. 

On   the   other   hand,   as   we   have   seen,  Dickinson 
arrayed  himself,  absolutely,  against  subscription,  in  any 
form  whatever;  a  position  which  was,  no  doubt,  hastily 
taken;  and  which  was  undoubtedly  surrendered,  alto- 
gether, by   him,  in  consenting  to  the  Adopting  Act. 
This  point  being  given  up,  there  was  really  no  further 
room  for  controversy.   When  the  parties  came  to  under- 
stand each  other,  the  whole  matter  reduced  itself  to  a 
question  of  words.     The  author  of  "  Dickinson  on  the 
Five  Points"  had  not  acted  in  the  interest  of  a  lax 
theology.     His  objection  was  not  to  the  importance  and 
necessity  of  soundness  in  the  faith,  nor  to  the  authority 
of  the  Church  to  insist  on  and    enforce  it.     This  he 
strenuously  urged,  in  his  very  argument  against  the  over- 
ture.    What  he  denied  was  the  efficacy  of  adopting  the 
Confession,  as  a  public  standard,  in  securing  this.    And, 
the  question  on  that  point  being  yielded,  he  only  further 
required   that   the   adoption   should   be  in  such  form 
as   would  not  tend  to   infringe  the   liberty  of   God's 
people,  by  any  seeming  usurpation  of  the  regal  authority 
of    Christ.      This   was   accomplished   by   the   distinct 
repudiation  of  any  such  authority,  stated  in  the  pre- 
amble to  the  Preliminary  Act ;  and  by  the  allowance 
that  absolute  agreement  with  the  Confession  was  not 


THE   PRELIMI2^ARY   ACT.  79 

necessary,  on  non-essential  points;  guarding,  at  the 
same  time,  the  door  thus  opened,  by  the  express  pro- 
vision that  the  Presbyteries  and  Synod  were  to  be  the 
judges  of  what,  in  the  Confession,  is  immaterial,  and 
what  essential.  But,  in  all  this,  there  was  no  compro- 
mise, on  the  part  of  the  advocates  of  subscription. 
They  had  not  asked  the  Synod  to  assume  to  itself  power 
to  add  to  the  law  of  Christ ;  nor  proposed  to  exalt  the 
Confession  to  a  level  with  his  \Yord.  As  promptly  as 
any,  would  they  have  united  in  resisting,  even  to  death, 
any  such  attempt.  What  was  granted  in  the  Adopting 
Acts,  was  precisely  what  the  overture  proposed ;  and  it 
was,  therefore,  so  cordially  accepted  by  the  authors  of 
that  paper. 

But  the  Preliminary  Act  is  charged  with  ambiguity. 
There  are  certain  points  in  it,  set  forth,  it  will  be  ad- 
mitted, with  unambiguous  clearness. — That  the  Confes- 
sion, as  a  whole,  is  in  accordance  with  the  Word  of  God. 
-—That  it  is  not  infallibly  true,  in  all  its  details. — That 
all  the  doctrines  therein  contained  are  not  of  equal  im- 
portance ;  but  that  whilst  some  forms  of  error  are  com-  • 
paratively  harmless,  there  are  others  of  more  serious  \ 
import. — That  there  is,  therefore,  room  for  allowable 
and  innocent  diversity  of  sentiment,  among  the  minis- 
try, on  some  points ;  and  necessity  for  agreement  on 
others ;  and  that  no  individual  is  at  liberty  to  oppose 
any  doctrine,  whatever,  of  the  Confession,  upon  the  as- 
sumption that  it  is  non-essential,  without  first  submit- 
ting the  question  to  the  adjudication  of  the  church 
courts,  and  conforming  himself  to  their  judgment. — All 
this  very  clearly  appears  in  the  paper. 

The  ambiguity  of  the  document  consists  in  its  failing 


80  HISTORY  OF   THE   NEW  SCHOOL. 

to  indicate  the  line  of  demarcation  between  tlie  essential 
and  non-essential  doctrines.  A  regard  to  the  precise 
object  of  the  paper,  itself,  and  its  position  in  the  series 
of  transactions  Avill  shed  light  on  this  point.  The 
p'aper  was  cautionary  in  its  design  and  origin.  The 
suspicions  of  sinister  motives,  which,  Dickinson  and 
his  friends  entertained,  at  first,  against  the  authors  of 
the  movement,  were  now,  no  doubt  laid  aside.  But  the 
re2:)utation  of  the  Scotch  for  pertinacity  and  exclusive- 
ness,  on  small  points,  was  as  great  then  as  now.  Situa- 
ted as  "  the  English"  members  of  the  Synod  were,  they 
could  not  anticipate  what  minute  point  might  be  forced 
into  undue  prominence  by  their  brethren,  when  the 
Confession  should  have  been  established  as  the  standard 
of  the  Church.  The  AYestminster  articles,  on  the  rela- 
tions of  Church  and  State  and  the  powers  of  the  civil 
magistrate  in  sacred  things,  which  have  since  been 
altered  by  our  Church,  then  stood  in  their  original  form. 
The  attempt  might  be  made  to  put  the  most  objection- 
able sense  upon  these  articles,  and  to  thrust  them  upon 
the  Synod  as  essential  parts  of  the  book,  and  terms  of 
ministerial  fellowship.  And,  further,  when  the  mem- 
bers of  the  Synod  should  be  called  on  to  declare  their 
acceptance  of  the  Confession,  it  was  impossible  to  an- 
ticipate which  of  the  most  valuable  meml^ers  might 
prov^e  to  hold  some  opinion  as  to  ^^  doctrine,  worship  or 
government,"  not  in  strict  accordance  with  the  teachings 
of  the  Confession ;  and  which,  however  unimportant, 
might  be  made  the  ground  of  his  exclusion.  Thus,  at 
so  early  a  date  as  1707,  a  difference  of  sentiment  as  to 
"worship,"  had  been  developed  between  the  Presbytery 
and    Mr.    Andrews,    respecting    the   stated   expository 


THE   PRELIMINARY   ACT.  81 

reading  of  the  Scriptures,  as  part  of  the  Sabbath  morn- 
ing services ;  and  it  is  doubtful  whether  he  ever,  on  this 
point,  conformed  to  the  Scotch  mode.  The  difficulties 
in  New  York,  involved  many  questions  between  the 
stricter  discipline  of  the  Scotch,  and  the  looser  views  of 
others. 

It  was,  as  the  breakwater,  erected  for  protection 
against  a  possible  tide  of  violence,  coming  in  at  the 
close,  on  points  such  as  these, — as  a  safeguard  to  the 
minority,  until  the  designs  and  ends  of  the  majority 
were  more  fully  known,  that  the  ambiguous  phrases  of 
the  Preliminary  Act  were  adopted.  And  when,  after 
free  and  full  conference,  the  entire  Synod  proved  to  be 
perfectly  harmonious,  in  the  interpretation  given  to  the 
questionable  clauses  of  chapters  twenty  and  twenty-three, 
and  the  unqualified  adoption  of  the  rest,  the  ambiguous 
expressions  had  already  fulfilled  their  design,  and  were 
cast  aside,  as  obsolete ;  the  unanimity  of  the  Synod  in 
the  unqualified  adoption  of  the  Confession,  being  recog- 
nized, as  we  shall  presently  see,  as  superseding  the 
vague  and  ambiguous  generalities  of  the  Preliminary 
Act. 

Further,  it  is  to  be  considered  that,  even  apart  from 
the  special  and  obvious  intent  of  the  indefiniteness  of 
the  expressions  of  the  Preliminary  Act,  it  is  impossible, 
from  the  very  nature  of  the  case,  to  be  much  more  pre- 
cise and  definite  than  are  the  phrases  in  question.  That 
there  is  just  ground  for  the  distinction  of  essential  and 
non-essential  doctrines  of  religion  is  conceded  by  all  the 
parties.  But  to  trace  by  anticipation,  the  line  of  de- 
marcation between  them,  and  state  precisely  how  far 
and  upon  what  points  diversity  may  be  tolerated,  and 


82  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

where  it  becomes  censurable;  is  beyond  the  skill  of 
human  intelligence.  The  Synod  declined  to  attempt 
it ;  but  left  each  case,  as  it  should  arise,  to  be  determined 
on  its  own  merits. 

The  question  remains,  whether  the  Adopting  Act  was 
designed  to  establish  a  rule  of  strict  conformity  to  the 
connected  doctrines  of  the  Confession,  or  to  allow  a 
liberal  margin  of  departure  from  them.  On  this  point, 
the  only  information  contained  in  the  Preliminary  Act, 
is  included  under  two  heads ; — that,  as  the  Confession 
then  stood,  there  were  in  it  articles  not  essential  and 
necessary ;  respecting  which,  diversity  of  sentiment 
would  not  necessarily  operate  exclusion  from  the  minis- 
try ; — and,  that,  even  on  these  points,  parties  must  make 
known,  to  the  proper  court  of  the  Church,  any  such 
opinions,  and  submit  themselves  to  its  judgment,  re- 
specting them. 

In  the  Adopting  Act,  itself,  we  do  not  find  the  mem- 
bers to  have  availed  themselves  of  this  provision,  on 
any  point,  except  those  having  reference  to  the  civil 
magistrate.  They  unanimously  agreed  in  the  solution 
of  all  the  scruples  that  any  of  them  had  to  make  against 
any  articles  and  expressions  in  the  Confession  and  Cate- 
chisms, and  in  declaring  the  said  Confession  and  Cate- 
chisms, to  be  the  confession  of  their  faith,  "  exeepting 
only''  those  clauses. 

Here,  the  comprehension  and  the  exception  are  both 
significant.  The  members  did  not  reject  the  excepted 
clauses.  But  those  clauses  were  obscure  and  suscept- 
ible of  an  obnoxious  sense.  This  sense  is  specified,  in 
order  to  its  rejection.      The  scrupulous  particularity, 


THE   PRELIMINARY   ACT.  83 

here,  is  significanl  as  to  the  unqualified  manner  in 
which,  otherwise,  the  book  was  received. 

The  Synod,  then,  started  out  with  the  adoption,  with- 
out exception  or  reservation,  of  every  chapter  and  arti- 
cle of  the  Confession  and  Catechisms,  by  the  unanimous 
voice  of  the  members ;  a  caution  only  being  entered 
against  what  many  others,  as  well  as  Blair,  believed  to 
be  a  false  interpretation  of  two  or  three  clauses,  which 
are  now  no  longer  in  the  book. 

For  themselves,  this  was  their  only  recourse  to  the 
distinction  between  necessary  and  non-necessary  arti- 
cles. Otherwise,  they  asked  no  relaxation  of  the  strict- 
est rule  of  interpretation.  What  did  they  require  of 
others  ?  Were  candidates  to  be  indulged  with  a  larger 
liberty  than,  thus,  the  members  required  for  themselves  ? 

In  the  proceedings  of  1729,  this  point  is  left  unde- 
termined. The  next  Synod  adopted  the  following  min- 
ute :  "  Whereas,  Some  persons  have  been  dissatisfied  at 
the  manner  of  wording  our  last  year's  agreement  about 
the  Confession,  etc.,  supposing  some  expressions  not 
sufficiently  obligatory  upon  intrants : 

"  Overtured,  That  the  Synod  do  now  declare,  that  they 
understand  these  clauses  that  respect  the  admission  of 
intrants  or  candidates,  in  such  a  sense  as  to  oblige  them 
to  receive  and  adopt  the  Confession  and  Catechisms,  at 
their  admission,  in  the  same  manner  and  as  fully  as 
the  members  of  Synod  did,  that  were  then  present : — 
Which  overture  was  unanimously  agreed  to  by  the 
Synod.''* 

The  Synod  which  thus  unanimously  expounded  the 
Adopting  Act  was  a  full  meeting,  and  of  as  high  author- 

*  Records,  p.  98. 


84  HISTOKY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

ity  as  that  of  the  preceding  year.  And  its  interpreta- 
tion of  the  Act,  even  although  it  had  been  mistaken  as 
to  the  intention  of  the  authors  of  it,  is  of  equal  author- 
ity, and  therefore,  fixes  unequivocally  tlie  effect  of  the 
Act,  with  respect  to  intrants.  They,  too,  must  receive 
and  adopt  it  as  did  the  members  of  Synod,  at  the  first, 
without  reservation,  except  as  to  the  designated  clauses. 
Nor  have  we  any  reason  to  imagine  that  this  interpre- 
tation of  the  intent  of  the  Adopting  Act  was  at  all  erro- 
neous. Of  the  eighteen  ministers  who  united  in  adopt- 
ing the  Act,  twelve  were  now  present,  and  unanimously 
concurred  in  the  interpretation  here  given ;  and  of  the 
seventeen  now  in  attendance,  but  seven  could  be  counted 
as  of  the  stricter  Scotch  party.  The  exposition  now 
given  was  not,  therefore,  in  the  interest  of  that  party, 
nor  in  violation  of  the  wishes  and  sentiments  of  the 
others ;  but  must  be  taken  as  a  true  account  of  the 
understanding  of  the  members,  at  the  time  of.  the  pas- 
sage of  the  Adopting  Act,  as  to  its  effect,  with  relation 
to  intrants. 

When  the  members  originally  united  in  the  Act,  "  one 
declared  himself  not  prepared."  This  was  Mr.  Elmer, 
a  new  member,  who  now,  with  Mr.  Morgan  and  Mr. 
Pemberton,  who  were  before  absent,  reported  "  that  they 
have  declared  before  the  Presbytery,  and  desire  that 
their  names  be  inserted  in  our  Synodical  records." 

Also,  "Mr.  David  Evans,  having  withdrawn  from 
the  Synod  three  years  ago,  upon  a  protest  put  in  by 
him  and  some  other  brethren,  declared  his  hearty  con- 
cern for  his  withdrawal,  and  desired  to  be  received  as  a 
member  again.  And,  he  having  proposed  all  the  scru- 
ples he  had  to  make  about  any  articles  of  the  Con- 


THE   PRELIMINARY   ACT.  85 

fession  and  Catechisms,  etc.,  to  the  satisfaction  of  the 
Synod,  and  declared  his  adopting  the  Westminster  Con- 
fession of  Faith  and  Catechisms,  agreeably  to  last  year's 
Adopting  Act,  he  was  unanimously  received  in,  as  a 
member  again ;  and  for  his  ease,  is  joined  to  the  Pres- 
bytery of  Philadelphia."*  The  occasion  of  his  former 
protest  and  withdrawal  does  not  aj^pear.  The  Minutes 
of  1727,  only  state  that  "  a  paper  of  protest  was  brought 
into  the  Synod,  after  all  business  was  done,  by  Messrs. 
Jones,  David  Evans,  Webb,  and  Hubbell,  which  was 
ordered  to  be  kept,  in  retentisJ^'f 

Thus,  with   patient   forbearance  and   prudence,  but    h 
firmly  and  decidedly,  were  the  lines  drawn,  and  the 
bounds  of  the  camp  fixed  and  marked. 

For  two  or  three  years,  without  any  special  order  on 
the  subject,  reports  came  up  of  the  compliance  of  in- 
coming ministers  with  the  Adopting  Act.  It  was  then, 
in  1734;— 

"  Ordered,  that  the  Synod  make  a  particular  inquiry, 
during  the  time  of  their  meeting  every  year,  whether 
such  ministers  as  have  been  received  as  members,  since 
the  foregoing  meeting  of  the  Synod,  have  adopted,  or 
have  been  required  by  the  Synod  or  by  the  respective 
Presbyteries  to  adopt,  the  Westminster  Confession  and 
Catechisms,  with  the  Directory,  according  to  the  Acts 
of  the  Synod  made  some  years  since,  for  that  purpose ; 
and  that,  also,  the  report  made  to  the  Synod,  in  answer 
to  said  inquiry,  be  recorded  in  the  minutes.^'l 

From  this  date,  the  inquiry  here  indicated  was  regu- 

*  Kecords,  p.  97.         f  Ibid.,  p.  88.     "  In  retentis," — On  file. 
X  Records,  p.  109. 


8 


86  HISTOEY   OF   THE   NEW  SCHOOL. 

larly  made,  and  the  result  recorded.  At  least,  until  the 
schism  of  1741,  no  man  was  admitted  into  the  ministry 
of  the  Church,  without  his  adoption  of  the  Confession, 
according  to  the  strict  terms  of  the  final  Act  of  1729, 
being  ascertained  and  entered  upon  the  records  of 
Synod. 

It  is,  here,  further  worthy  of  notice,  that  while  the 
doctrinal  standards  were  thus  strictly  adopted  and 
enforced,  a  different  rule  was  applied  to  the  Discij^line 
and  Directory.  These,  as  we  have  seen,  were  pro- 
nounced, by  the  Synod,  to  be  agreeable,  "m  substance/' 
to  the  Word  of  God.  The  meaning  of  this  significant 
distinction,  we  shall  hereafter  see  stated  by  a  most  com- 
petent committee  of  the  Synod  itself. 


CHAPTER    V. 

THE    EXPLANATORY   ACT    OF    1736. 

Misunderstandings  of  the  Act,  among  the  people — Entered  in  Pres- 
bytery books — Explanations  of  1736 — Misrepresentations  of  that 
minute — Gillett's  History — Preposterous  ground  there  taken — 
Position  of  the  "  New  Side"  men — Blair's  statement,  in  reply  to 
Craighead — He  views  the  Acts  of  1729  and  1736,  as  entirely  con- 
sistent and  true — At  least,  this  was  the  accepted  interpretation — 
All  parties  were  alike  zealous  in  behalf  of  the  strictest  orthodoxy. 

Whilst,  thus,  the  Synod  was  using  every  means  to 
establish  the  Westminster  symbols,  as  the  standards  of 
the  Church  and  the  confession  of  faith  of  its  ministers, — 
occasion  of  misapprehension  and  suspicion  had  occurred. 
The  Preliminary  Act  had  been  printed  and  circulated, 
alone,  without  the  Adopting  Act,  itself.  Whether  an 
enemy  had  done  this,  we  are  uninformed.  But  the 
effect  was,  to  excite  apprehension  that  the  body  had 
adopted  latitudinarian  principles.  The  Synod  therefore, 
in  1735,  "ordered,  That  each  Presbytery  have  the  whole 
Adopting  Act  inserted  in  their  Presbytery  book.^'* 

Still,  uneasiness  prevailed,  in  some  quarters,  and,  in 
1736,  "An  overture  of  the  committee,  upon  the  suppli- 
cation of  the  people  of  Paxton  and  Derry,  was  brought 
in,  and  is  as  followeth  : — 

"  That  the  Synod  do  declare,  that  inasmuch  as   we 

*  Records,  p.  115. 

87 


'  ( 


88  HISTORY   OF   THE  NEW  SCHOOL. 

understand  that  many  persons  of  our  persuasion,  both 
more  lately  and  formerly,  have  been  offended  with  some 
expressions  or  distinctions,  in  the  First  or  Preliminary 
Act  of  our  Synod,  contained  in  the  printed  paper,  relat- 
ing to  our  receiving  or  adopting  the  Westminster  Con- 
fession and  Catechisms,  etc.,  that,  in  order  to  remove 
said  offence,  and  all  jealousies  that  have  arisen,  or  may 
arise,  in  any  of  our  people's  minds,  on  occasion  of  said 
distinctions  and  expressions,  the  Synod  doth  declare 
that  the  Synod  have  adopted,  and  still  do  adhere  to  the 
Westminster  Confession,  Catechisms,  and  Directory, 
without  the  least  variation  or  alteration ;  and  without 
any  regard  to  said  distinctions.  And  we  do  further 
declare  that  this  was  our  meaning  and  true  intent  in 
our  first  adopting  of  said  Confession,  as  may  particularly 
appear,  by  our  Adopting  Act,  which  is  as  followeth  : — 
'All  the  ministers  of  the  Synod*  now  present,  (which 
were  eighteen  in  number,  except  one  that  declared  him- 
self not  prepared,)  after  proposing  all  the  scruples  any 
of  them  had  to  make  against  any  articles  and  expres- 
sions in  the  Confession  of  Faith,  and  Larger  and 
Shorter  Catechisms  of  the  Assembly  of  Divines  at 
Westminster,  have  unanimously  agreed,  in  the  solution 
of  these  scruples,  and  in  declaring  the  said  Confession 
and  Catechisms  to  be  the  confession  of  their  faith, 
except  only  some  clauses  in  the  twentieth  and  twenty- 
third  chapters ;  concerning  which  clauses,  the  Synod  do 
unanimously  declare,  that  they  do  not  receive  those 
articles  in  any  such  sense  as  to  suppose  the  civil  magis- 
trate hath  a  controlling  power  over  Synods,  with  respect 
to  the  exercise  of  their  ministerial  authority,  or  power 
to  persecute  any  for  their  religion,  or  in  any  sense  con- 


THE   EXPLANATORY   ACT  OF   1736.  89 

trary  to  the  Protestant  succession  to  the  throne  of  Great 
Britain;' — And  we  hope  and  desire  that  this  our 
Synodical  declaration  and  explication  may  satisfy  all 
our  people,  as  to  our  firm  attachment  to  our  good  old 
received  doctrines,  contained  in  said  Confession,  without 
the  least  variation  or  alteration ;  and  that  they  will  lay 
aside  their  jealousies,  that  have  been  entertained,  through 
occasion  of  the  above  hinted  expressions  and  declara- 
tions, as  groundless. 

^'  This  overture  approved  nemine  contradiceyitej^* 
Here,  it  will  be  observed,  that  the  Synod,  after  de- 
claring that  they  have  adopted,  and  do  still  adhere  to 
the  Confession,  etc.,  ^'  without  the  least  variation  or 
alteration,  and  without  any  regard  to  said  distinctions," 
at  once  cites  the  language  of  the  Act,  in  w^hich,  appa- 
rently, a  very  signal  exception  is  specified.  How  is 
this?  Did  the  Synod  stultify  itself  in  thus  speaking? 
No !  but  the  members  denied  the  repudiated  sense  of . 
the  specified  articles  to  be  their  true  meaning ; — a  denial 
in  which  they  were  sure  of  being  sustained  by  the 
common  voice  of  their  people. 

This  very  harmless  paper,  has  elicited  an  extraor- 
dinary amount  of  displeasure  and  misrepresentation. 
The  New  School  Assembly  of  1839,  in  a  solemn  Dec- 
laration, issued  by  it,  asserts,  that  '^  in  1 736,  that  party 
who  were  in  favor  of  the  strong  measures  of  the  Scot- 
tish Church,  had  gained  so  much  ascendancy  that  they 
brought  a  majority  of  the  Synod  to  follow  the  example 
of  the  two  Presbyteries  of  New  Castle  and  Donegal, 
and  adopt  the  Confession,  Catechisms,  and  Directory  of 
the  Westminster  Assembly  of  Divines,  without  altera- 
*  No  one  dissenting.     Records,  p.  126  j  Digest,  p.  31. 


90  HISTOEY   OF   THE  NEW  SCHOOL. 

tion  or  exception ;  thus  establishing  the  power  of  the 
civil  magistrate  to  control  Synods  and  persecute  the 
Church/'*  And  Dr.  Gillett  says,  of  the  Synod's  state- 
ment, as  to  the  original  adoption  of  the  Confession, — 
^'  As  a  matter  of  fact,  this  was  not  true ;  as  a  matter  of 
right,  it  was  a  gross  injustice,  to  attempt  to  change  the 
constitutional  basis,  upon  w^hich  the  Synod  had  deliber- 
ately, and  with  full  notice  of  its  intention,  placed  itself. 
In  spite  of  this  action,  the  Adopting  Act  still  stood  as 
the  fundamental  and  constitutional  basis  of  the  Synod ; 
and  no  possible  interpretation  could  supersede  it.'^f  By 
'^  the  Adopting  Act,''  he  means  the  Preliminary  Act. 

A  glance  at  the  paper  ^\i\\  satisfy  the  reader  how 
utterly  groundless  the  assertion  that  the  Synod  of  1736, 
established  the  power  of  the  civil  magistrate  to  control 
Synods  and  persecute  the  Church.  That  its  statement 
of  the  facts  is  true,  we  have  already  seen.  The  des- 
perate assertion  of  the  unquenchable  vitality  of  the 
Preliminary  Act  and  of  its  paramount  obligation,  in 
spite  of  all  subsequent  determinations,  by  the  same 
authority,  is  merely  ludicrous ;  and  the  charge  of  false- 
hood and  injustice,  recorded  against  the  fathers  of  our 
Church,  arouses  a  just  indignation. 

A  statement  which  corresponds  with  all  the  facts  of 
previous  record ;  which  Avas  made  within  seven  years 
of  the  occurrence ;  entered  upon  record  by  the  unani- 
mous voice  of  every  man  in  the  Synod,  English  and 
Welsh,  Irish,  Scotch  and  New  Englanders,  Old  Side 
and  New  !  A  statement  confirmed  by  every  contempo- 
raneous fact  and  witness,  and  which  was  questioned  by 

*  Minutes,  N.  S.  Assembly,  1839,  p.  57. 
t  Gillett's  History,  i.  58. 


THE   EXPLANATORY   ACT   OF   1736.  91 

no  one,  until  a  century  had  elapsed  ! — The  writer,  who 
will  venture  to  brand  the  fathers  of  our  Church  with 
falsehood  in  such  a  statement  as  this,  may  claim  the 
meed  of  courage.  But  it  is  awarded  at  the  expense  of 
the  higher  virtues  of  impartial  fidelity  to  the  facts  of 
history. 

Gross  injustice  is  charged.  But  against  whom?  Not 
a  voice  in  the  Synod,  then  or  subsequently  complained 
or  protested.  Not  a  hint  of  dissatisfaction  is  heard, 
there  or  elsewhere,  on  the  subject.  AVere  those  who 
subsequently  formed  the  jSTew  Side  party  the  persons 
injured?  They  utterly  refuse  to  occupy  that  position; 
but  expressly  confirm  the  declaration  of  the  Synod  of 
1736.  In  fact  two  of  the  Tennent's  (William,  the 
father,  and  his  son,  of  the  same  name,)  were  present, 
when  the  Synod  unanimously  made  that  declaration. 
If  it  was  false,  they  are  as  deeply  implicated  as  any 
others. 

Samuel  Blair,  too,  will  be  acknowledged  competent 
to  testify  for  that  party ;  and  he  certainly  had  the 
means  of  knowing  whereof  he  affirmed.  His  evidence 
we  have ;  given  under  circumstances  demanding  the 
strictest  accuracy.  iUexander  Craighead  had  with- 
drawn -from  the  Synod,  with  the  New  Brunswick  jjarty. 
But  he  immediately  separated  himself  from  them,  upoi:^ 
their  declining  to  adopt  the  Solemn  Let\gue  and  Cove*, 
.nant.  In  reply  to  cavils,  thereupon,  published  by  him, 
Blair  speaks  in  the  following  terms  : — 

"  Now, — whether  Mr.  Craighead  could  suppose  so  or 
not,  that  neither  Synod  nor  Presbytery,  in  this  pro- 
vince, did  ever  receive  the  AVestminster  Confession  of 
Faith,  in  every  chapter  of  it, — the  thing,  itself,  is  maui- 


92  HISTOKY  OF  THE  KEW  SCHOOL. 

festly  false  iu  fact  both  ways.  There  never  was  any 
scruplej  that  ever  I  heard  of,  ruade  by  any  member  of 
the  Synod,  about  any  part  of  the  Confession  of  Faith ; 
but  only  about  some  j)articular  clauses  in  the  twentieth 
and  twenty-third  chapters ;  and  those  clauses  were  ex- 
cepted against,  in  the  Synod's  act  receiving  the  Confes- 
sion of  Faith,  only  in  such  a  sense,  which,  for  my  part, 
I  believe  the  reverend  composers  never  intended  in 
them ;  but  which  might,  notwithstanding,  be  readily 
put  upon  them.  Mr.  Craighead,  to  prove  what  he  sup- 
poses, dwells  much  on  what  is  called  the  Synod's  Pre- 
liminary Act  about  the  Confession  of  Faith,  made  in 
1729.  But  let  that  Act  be  thought  as  insufficient  as  it 
can  possibly  admit,  and  granting  that  it  was  not  suffi- 
cient for  the  securing  of  a  sound  orthodox  ministry; 
yet  that  is  no  argument  but  the  Confession  of  Faith 
has  been  sufficiently  received  by  other  Acts.  And  so, 
in  fact,  it  has  been,  by  the  Synod's  Act  for  the  purpose, 
I  think  in  the  year  1730,  [1729]  wherein  the  Synod  de- 
clares, ^  All  the  ministers  of  the  Synod  now  present,' '' — 
(Here  Mr.  Blair  copies  the  Adopting  Act  in  full.  He 
then  continues, — )  "  Here  you  see,  the  Synod  have  re- 
ceived the  whole  of  the  Westminster  Confession  of  Faith 
and  Catechisms,  as  the  confession  of  their  fixith,  save  only 
some  clauses  in  the  twentieth  and  twenty-third  chapters." 
Again,  Mr.  Blair  proceeds  to  cite  this  very  act  of 
1736.  "  Moreover,  in  the  year  1736,  the  Synod  declare 
that  they  adopted  and  do  still  adhere  to  the  Westmins- 
ter Confession,  Catechisms,  and  Directory,  without  the 
least  variation  or  alteration,  and  without  any  regard  to 
the  distinctions  in  the  aforesaid  Preliminary  Act.  It 
seems,  some  people  were  jealous,  from  the  first  Prelimi- 


THE   EXPLANATORY   ACT   OF    1736.  93 

nary  Act,  (without  knowing  or  considering  that  the 
Synod  had  afterward  agreed  in  the  solutions  of  all 
scruples,  which  any  of  them  had,  concerning  any  arti- 
cles or  expressions  in  the  Confession  of  Faith ;  and  so, 
unanimously  adopted  and  received  it,  in  a  fixed,  deter- 
minate, manner,  as  before  related ;)  that  the  Synod  were 
about  to  vary  and  alter  the  Confession  and  Directory, 
and  to  set  up  new  2)rinciples  of  religion  and  govern- 
ment, contrary  thereto.  In  answer  to  -which  jealousies, 
the  Synod  declares  that  they  adhere  to  the  Westminster 
Confession,  .Catechisms,  and  Directory,  without  the 
least  variation  or  alteration ;  which  view  of  the  case 
takes  away  all  Mr.  Craighead's  pretence  for  calling  this 
declaration  notoriously  false.  Mr.  Craighead  may  read- 
ily remember,  that  when  our  two  Presbyteries  met  toge- 
ther, June  3,  1741,  after  the  separation  of  the  Synod, 
we  declared  and  recorded  that  we  adhered  to  the  West- 
minster Confession  of  Faith,  Catechisms,  and  Direc- 
tory, as  closely  and  fully  as  ever  the  Synod  of  Phila- 
delphia, in  any  of  their  public  acts  or  agreements  about 
them."* 

It  was  above  stated,  that  all  contemporary  testimony 
confirms  the  truth  of  the  Synod's  statement  in  1736. 
Possibly,  Mr.  Craighead  must  be  excepted ;  to  whom 
however,  and  to  our  historian,  Blair's  answer  may  be 
held  sufficient.  And  further,  it  is  to  be  observed,  that 
Craighead's  assertion  applies  no  more  directly  to  the 
Act  of  1729  than  to  that  of  1736.  Even  the  latter, 
he  denies  to  have  involved  such  an  adoption  as  would, 

*  Animadversions  on  the  Reasons  of  Mr.  Alexander  Craighead's 
receding  from  the  judicatures  of  this  Church,  together  with  its  Con- 
stitution.    By  Samuel  Blair.     In  Hodge,  p.  198. 


94  HISTORY  OF   THE  NEW  SCHOOL. 

in  his  estimation,  have  been  sufficient.  The  suggestion 
of  a  scruple,  as  to  the  meaning  of  the  excepted  clauses, 
was  probably  offensive  to  him ;  and,  in  fact,  he  would 
have  accepted  nothing  short  of  the  unequivocal  adop- 
tion of  the  entire  book  without  reservation,  including 
the  Solemn  League  and  Covenant;  which  was  then 
found  in  all  editions  of  the  AYestminster  standards. 

A  careful  regard,  to  Blair^s  statement,  will  make  it 
evident,  that  he  viewed  the  several  stages  in  the  pro- 
ceedings of  1729,  in  precisely  the  light,  in  which  we 
have  exhibited  them.  The  members,  at  first,  cautiously 
felt  their  way,  until  they  came  to  a  mutual  understand- 
ing, as  to  the  extent  of  the  objects  of  the  movers  of  the 
overture ;  and  the  real  sentiments  of  those  who,  at  first, 
opposed  it.  This  once  attained,  all  difficulty  was  at  an 
end,  and  opposition  ceased. 

That  the  declaration  of  1736  did  truly  interpret  that 
of  1729,  is  evident.  It  is,  further,  unquestionable,  that, 
true  or  false,  that  declaration  determined  the  sense  in 
which,  thenceforward,  the  Confession  was  adopted  by 
candidates.  At  least,  until  the  withdrawal  of  the  New 
Brunswick  party,  in  1741,  no  man  was  admitted  into 
the  ministry  of  the  Synod,  who  had  not,  in  this  strictest 
mode,  adopted  the  entire  Confession,  and,  of  whose 
adoption  notice  was  not  taken  on  the  record  of  Synod. 

They  were  masters  of  the  theology  of  that  Confession. 
They  appreciated  fully,  and  none  more  fully  than  the 
New  Brunswick  brethren,  the  symmetry  of  its  struc- 
ture, the  justness  of  its  proportions,  and  the  accuracy  of 
its  details.  They  could  not,  therefore,  fail  to  realize 
how  fatal  to  the  whole  structure  might  be  the  opening 
of  a  single  joint, — the  loosening  of  the  smallest  stone 


THE   EXPLANATORY   ACT   OF   1736.  95 

of  the  building.  Themselves  grounded  in  the  system, 
they,  therefore,  permitted  no  secret  doubts  or  scruples 
on  any  teaching  of  the  book.  If  any  such  were  enter- 
tained, they  must  be  made  known  to  the  Church,  and  its 
decision  thereon  obeyed. 

Such  are  the  facts,  as  to  this  first  period  in  the  his- 
tory of  our  Church ;  an4  such  the  position  in  which  it 
stood,  at  the  close  of  that  period,  as  to  its  public  Con- 
fession. Not,  as  articles  of  comprehension;  not,  for 
substance  of  doctrine ;  not  as  a  "  system,'^  merely ;  but, 
in  all  the  articles  thereof,  with  that  one  exception, 
which  so  strongly  establishes  the  comprehensiveness  of 
the  obligation,  as  to  every  clause  besides,  the  AYestmin- 
ster  standards  were  received  and  set  forth,  as  the  con- 
fession of  their  faith,  individually  and  as  a  body. 
Cherishing  that  whole  system,  as  the  truth  of  God; 
and,  in  that  faith,  looking  for  eternal  life,  their  preach- 
ing was  a  testimony  to  its  doctrines.  And,  in  their 
writings,  they,  being  dead,  yet  speak  the  same  testi- 
mony, with  demonstration  and  power. 


CHAPTER  VI. 

THE   NEW   SIDE   SCHISM. 

Prior  state  of  the  churches — Prevalence  of  Irreligion — The  Great 
Awakening — Disorders — The  Tennents — Intrusions  into  churches — 
Act  of  Synod  on  the  subject — Act  on  examination  of  candidates — 
New  Brunswick  Protest — Old  Side  protest  of  1741 — The  schism — 
New  Brunswick  Adopting  Act — Their  Declaration — New  York 
members  labor  for  reunion — Their  amicable  withdrawal — Erection 
of  New  York  Synod — Basis  of  it — New  Side  no  liberalists — Claim 
Scotch  affiliation — They  held  the  Confession  as  a  test  of  Orthodoxy 
— Letter  to  Scotch  Assembly — New  Haven  Adopting  Act  of  1753. 

We  have  seen  the  history  of  the  Adopting  Act,  and 
the  attitude  of  the  Church  on  the  subject,  down  to  the 
schism  of  1741.  Let  us  now  inquire,  whether  the  sub- 
sequent history  corresponds  with  the  foregoing. 

The  tendency  which  manifested  itself  in  the  churches 
of  Europe,  in  the  first  half  of  the  eighteenth  century,  to 
lapse  into  fatal  heresies,  was  not  so  fully  developed,  in  this 
country.  Yet  all  the  evidence  assures  us  of  the  exceed- 
ingly low  state  of  religion,  and  the  abounding  of  world- 
liness  and  licentiousness,  among  the  people  at  large. 

"  I  doubt  not  but  there  were  some  sincerely  religious 
persons,  up  and  down,'^  says  the  Rev.  Samuel  Blair ; 
"  and  there  were,  I  believe,  a  considerable  number,  in 
several  congregations,  pretty  exact,  according  to  their 

education,  in  the  observance  of  the  external  forms  of 
96 


THE  :new  side  schism.  97 

religion ;  not  only,  as  to  attendance  upon  public  ordi- 
nances on  the  Sabbath,  but,  also,  as  to  the  practice  of 
family  worship,  and,  perhaps,  secret  prayer,  too  •  but, 
with  those  things,  the  most  part  seemed,  to  all  aj^pear- 
ance,  to  rest  contented,  and  to  satisfy  their  conscience 
with  a  dead  formality  in  religion.  A  lamentable  igno- 
rance of  the  essentials  of  true  practical  religion,  and  of 
the  doctrines  relating  thereto  very  generally  prevailed. 
The  nature  and  necessity  of  the  ncAV  birth,  were  little 
known  or  thought  of;  the  necessity  of  a  conviction  of 
sin  and  misery,  by  the  Holy  Ghost  opening  and  apply- 
ing; the  law  to  the  conscience,  in  order  to  a  savinoj 
closure  with  Christ,  was  hardly  known  at  all,  to  most. 
The  necessity  of  being  first  in  Christ,  by  a  vital  union, 
and  in  a  justified  state,  before  our  religious  services  can 
be  well  pleasing  or  acceptable  to  God,  was  very  little 
understood  or  thought  of;  _  but  the  common  notion 
seemed  to  be,  that,  if  people  were  aiming  to  be  in  the 
way  of  duty,  as  well  as  they  could,  as  they  imagined, 
there  was  no  reason  to  be  much  afraid."* 

Such  was  the  state  of  religion,  in  the  most  favorable 
circumstances,  both  in  Europe  and  America,  when  that 
remarkable  work  of  grace  began,  which  is  known  as 
The  Great  Awakening.  Among  the  churches  of  the 
Synod,  it  commenced  in  1730,  in  the  pastoral  charge 
of  the  Rev.  John  Tennent,  in  Freehold,  New  Jersey. 
Great  blessings  folloAved,  in  many  places.  Believers 
were  quickened,  and  the  ungodly  awakened  and  con- 
verted, in  great  numbers.  But,  soon,  grievous  disorders 
marred  the  work.  A  diversity  of  sentiment  arose 
respecting  it,  among  the  best  men  in  the  Synod.    Those 

*  Blair's  Works,  p.  336. 
9 


98  HISTORY   OF   THE  NEW  SCHOOL. 

who  were  not  prepared  to  go  all  the  lengths  of  extrava- 
gance were  denounced  as  ^'  blind  leaders  of  the  blmd," 
"  dry,  saj)less,  unconverted,  ministers/'  "  babbling,  igno- 
rant priests,''  "  the  devil's  advocates,"  "  diabolical  rea- 
soners,"  "  ministers  of  Satan  and  enemies  of  all  right- 
eousness." Their  congregations  were  intruded  upon; 
their  people  seduced,  and  distraction  and  division  pre- 
vailed. 

Especially  conspicuous  for  zeal  and  success,  in  gather- 
ing in  the  abundant  harvest  of  that  day,  were  the  Ten- 
nents  and  the  other  pupils  of  the  patriarch  of  the  Log 
College,  at  Neshaminy.  But  the  Petrine  impetuosity 
and  fervor  of  spirit,  which  were  chief  elements  of  their 
power,  in  thundering  the  terrors  of  the  law  upon  the 
impenitent,  and  pressing  the  claims  of  the  gospel  on 
the  consciences  of  the  awakened,  operated,  at  the  same 
time,  to  induce  a  spirit  of  censoriousness  toward  others, 
and  a  contemptuous  disregard  of  the  rights  of  their 
brethren,  and  of  the  regulations  of  the  Synod  for  their 
protection. 

So  great  were  the  inconveniences  and  distractions  con- 
sequent upon  the  proceedings  of  the  New  Lights,  as  the 
patrons  of  extravagance  were  called,  that  the  Synod  was 
at  length  constrained  to  interpose.  Ministers  claimed 
to  have  such  a  special  and  extraordinary  illumination 
and  guidance  of  the  Spirit,  as  to  free  them  from  respon- 
sibility to  the  ordinary  rules  of  propriety,  and  the  regu- 
lations of  the  Church.  They  professed  to  have  the  gift 
of  discerning  spirits,  and  readily  pronounced  such  of 
their  brethren  as  could  not  approve  their  rash  and  vio- 
lent jDroceedings  to  be  unregenerate  men ;  and  "  it  was 
no  sin"  to  denounce  and  vituperate  such.     Their  pas- 


THE   NEW   SIDE   SCPIISM.  99 

toral  charges,  therefore  were  entered ;  the  people  taught 
to  despise  their  ministers ;  pastors  unsettled,  and  con- 
gregations rent  asunder. 

Not  only  were  such  measures  prevalent,  in  the  imme- 
diate vicinity  of  the  active  supporters  of  the  work  ;  but 
their  ministers  and  licentiates  traveled  in  all  directions, 
and,  by  similar  proceedings,  threw  the  entire  Church 
into  a  ferment. 

In  view  of  these  disorders,  the  Synod,  in  1737, 
passed  an  act  for  preventing  intrusions.  By  this  Act, 
ministers,  and,  especially,  probationers,  were  forbidden 
to  intrude  into  churches,  outside  their  own  Presbyteries, 
without  the  concurrence  of  the  brethren  of  the  Presby- 
tery of  the  bounds.*  This  Act,  however,  was  by  the 
offending  brethren,  utterly  disregarded. 

Another  occasion  of  difference  arose.  Hitherto,  the 
Synod  had  derived  its  suj)plies  of  ministers  from  abroad  ; 
of  men  who  had  already  been  thoroughly  trained,  in 
the  colleges  of  Britain  and  New  England.  As  the  can- 
didates from  Tennent's  school  began  to  multiply,  atten- 
tion was  called  to  the  necessity  of  some  measures  being 
taken  by  the  Synod,  to  ascertain  the  adequate  education 
of  those  who,  thus,  without  a  regular  collegiate  degree, 
were  entering  the  ministry.  Apprehension  was  felt, 
and  not  without  reason,  that  the  zeal  of  the  Tennents 
was  in  danger  of  hurrying  forward  a  number  of  youths, 
whose  training  was  essentially  defective. 

An  act  was  therefore  passed,  in  1738,  to  provide  for 
the  emergency.  It  declared  that  ''  natural  parts,  how- 
ever great  and  promising ;  for  want  of  being  well  im- 
proved, must  be  marred  of  their  usefulness/^  and  that 

*  Eecords,  pp.  134,  137. 


100  HISTOPwY   OF   THE  NEW  SCHOOL. 

"  want  of  due  care  and  pains  payes  the  way  for  igno- 
rance, and  this  for  a  formidable  train  of  sad  conse- 
quences/^ To  prevent  this  evil,  it  was  provided,  that 
every  student  who  had  not  graduated  in  some  college, 
before  being  encouraged  by  any  Presbytery  for  the  work 
of  the  ministry,  should  ''apply  himself  to  this  Synod; 
and  that  they  a2)point  a  committee  of  their  members, 
yearly,  whom  they  know  to  be  well  skilled  in  the  several 
branches  of  philosophy,  and  divinity,  and  the  languages, 
to  examine  such  students,  in  this  place,  and  finding 
them  well  accomplished  in  those  several  branches  of 
learning,  shall  allow  them  a  public  testimonial  from  the 
Synod,  which,  till  better  provision  be  made,  shall,  in 
some  measure,  answer  the  design  of  taking  a  degree  iu 
the  college/'* 

Against  these  Acts  of  the  Synod,  the  New  Brunswick 
brethren  entered  a  protest,  and  proceeded  in  entire  dis- 
regard of  them.  In  addition  to  the  charges  of  thus 
denying  the  authority  of  the  courts  of  the  Church,  and 
of  engaging  in  the  disorders  already  mentioned,  the 
New  Light  party  were  accused  of  departure  from  the 
doctrines  of  the  Confession,  in  several  particulars ;  as, 
in  asserting  ^'  that  every  true  Christian  is  sure  of  his 
own  conversion  ;  every  adult  person,  when  he  is  con- 
verted, must  be  able  to  tell  the  time,  place  and  manner 
of  his  conversion ;  that  no  adult  person  is  converted, 
without  first  undergoing  an  high  degree  of  legal,  un- 
gracious, preparatory,  convictions  and  terrors ;  with 
several  other  points  of  doctrine  which  have  no  founda- 
tion in  the  Word  of  God,  nor  are  they  agreeable  to  our 
Confession,  etc/'f 

*  Eecords,  p.  141.  f  Thomson's  Church  Government^  p.  32. 


THE   NEW  SIDE  SCHISM.  101 

* 

At  length  the  controversy  reached  a  crisis,  and  in 
1741,  the  Synod  was  rent  asunder.  A  protestation  was 
brought  in,  by  those  who  felt  aggrieved  by  the  course  of 
the  New  Brunswick  party. 

^'1.  W.e  protest,"  said  they,  "that  it  is  the  indis- 
pensable duty  of  this  Synod  to  maintain  and  stand  by 
the  principles  of  doctrine,  worship  and  government  of 
the  Church  of  Christ,  as  the  same  are  summed  up  in 
the  Confession  of  Faith,  Catechisms,  and  Directory, 
composed  by  the  Westminster  Assembly,  as  being 
agreeable  to  the  Word  of  God,  and  which  this  Synod 
have  owned,  acknowledged  and  adopted ;  as  may  ap- 
pear by  our  Synodical  records,  of  the  years  1729  and 
1736,  which  we  desire  to  be  read  publicly. 

"2.  We  protest  that  no  person.  Minister  or  Elder, 
should  be  allowed  to  sit  and  vote  in  this  Synod  who 
hath  not  received,  adopted,  or  subscribed,  the  said  Con- 
fessions, Catechisms,  and  Directory,  as  our  Presbyte- 
ries respectively  do ;  according  to  our  last  explanation 
of  the  Adopting  Act ;  or  who  is  either  accused  or  con- 
victed, or  may  be  convicted,  before  this  Synod,  or  any 
of  our  Presbyteries,  of  holding  or  maintaining  any  doc- 
trine, or  who  act  and  persist  in  any  practice,  contrary 
to  any  of  those  doctrines,  or  rules  contained  in  said  Di- 
rectory, or  contrary  to  any  known  rights  of  Presbytery, 
or  orders  made  or  agreed  to  by  this  Synod,  and  which 
stand  yet  unrepealed ;  unless,  or  until  he  renounce  such 
doctrine,  and,  being  found  guilty,  acknowledge,  confess, 
and  profess  his  sorrow  for  such  sinful  disorder,  to  the 
satisfaction  of  this  Synod,  or  such  inferior  judicatory  as 
the  Synod  shall  appoint  or  empower  for  that  purpose."* 

*  See  the  Protestation,  in  the  Eecords,  p.  157 ;  Diget^t,  p.  507. 
9  * 


102  HISTORY   OF   THE  NEW  SCHOOL. 

Upon  tliese  and  other  like  grounds  the  protesters 
asserted  that  the  disorderly  members  had  forfeited  their 
right  to  be  acknowledged  "as  members  of  this  judica- 
tory of  Christ;  whose  principles  and  practices  are  so 
diametrically  opposite  to  our  doctrine,  and  princi23les  of 
government  and  order,  which  the  great  King  of  the 
Church  hath  laid  down  in  his  Word." 

Upon  the  reading  of  this  paper,  the  New  Side  party 
took  the  ground  that,  as  the  signers  of  the  protest  were 
a  minority  of  the  body,  (but  twenty  out  of  forty-four), 
and  had  declared  that  they  could  not  remain  united ; 
they  should  withdraw.  The  protesters,  on  the  contrary 
maintained  that  the  New  Side  had  forfeited  their  seats, 
even  though  a  majority.  A  scene  of  confusion  ensued. 
The  New  Side  insisted  on  a  count.  A  tumultuary 
count  took  place,  during  which  the  Moderator,  Mr. 
Andrews  seems  to  have  left  the  chair.  The  New  Side 
proved  to  be  a  minority  ;  as  several  who  did  not  sign 
the  protest  were  in  hearty  sympathy  with  its  authors. 
Great  excitement  prevailed  ;  in  the  midst  of  which,  the 
moderator  resumed  the  chair,  and,  in  hopes  of  securing 
calmer  deliberation  and  action,  commanded  silence,  and 
called  upon  the  Synod  to  unite  in  an  appeal  to  the  Head 
of  the  Church,  in  prayer.  At  this  moment,  the  New 
Side  party  withdrew  from  the  house.  They,  at  once, 
met  in  a  Presbyterial  capacity;  took  measures  to 
perpetuate  their  organization  ;  and,  among  other  pro- 
ceedings, adopted  the  following  minute  as  to  the  charge 
of  departing  from  the  Confession :  "  Inasmuch  as  the 
Ministers  who  have  protested  against  our  being  of  their 
communion,  do,  at  least,  insinuate  filse  reflections 
against   us,   endeavoring   to  make  people  suspect  that 


THE   NEW   SIDE   SCHISM.  103 

we  are  receding  from  Presbyterian  principles ; — for  the 
satisfaction  of  such  Christian  people  as  may  be  stum- 
bled at  such  aspereions,  we  think  it  fit  unanimously  to 
declare  that  we  do  adhere  as  closely  and  fully  to  the 
Westminister  Confession  of  Faith,  Catechisms,  and 
Directory,  as  ever  the  Synod  of  Philadelphia  did,  in  any 
of  their  public  acts  or  statements  about  it.'^"^ 

Shortly  afterward,  the  same  body  issued  to  the  pub- 
lic a  "  Declaration"  of  their  views  and  principles,  in 
which  they  thus  announced  themselves  : — 

"  We  think  it  proper,  for  the  satisfaction  of  all,  con- 
cerning us,  and  as  a  due  testimony  to  the  truth  of  God, 
to  declare  and  testify  to  the  world  our  principles  and 
sentiments  in  religion,  according  to  which  we  design, 
though  divine  grace,  ever  to  conduct  ourselves,  both  as 
Christians  and  as  Ministers  and  Puling  Elders. 

*^  And,  firstj  as  to  the  doctrines  of  religion,  we  believe 
with  our  hearts,  and  profess  and  maintain  with  our  lips, 
the  doctrines  summed  up  and  contained  in  the  Confes- 
sion of  Faith,  and  Larger  and  Shorter  Catechisms, 
composed  by  the  reverend  Assembly  of  Divines  at 
Westminister,  as  the  truths  of  God,  revealed  and  con- 
tained in  the  holy  Scriptures  of  the  Old  and  New  Testa- 
ments; and  do  receive,  acknowledge,  and  declare  the 
said  Confession  of  Faith  and  Catechisms  to  be  the 
confession  of  our  faith;  yet  so  as  that  no  part  of 
the  twenty-third  chapter  of  said  Confession  shall  be  so 
construed  as  to  allow  civil  magistrates,  as  such,  to  have 
any  ecclesiastical  authority  in  Synods,  or  church  judica- 
tories, much  less  the  power  of  a  negative  voice  over 
them   in   their   ecclesiastical   transactions ;   nor  is   any 

*  Digest,  p.  32. 


104  HISTORY   OF   THE  NEW  SCHOOL. 

part  of  it  to  be  understood  as  opposite  to  the  memorable 
revolution^  and  the  settlement  of  the  crown  of  the  three 
kingdoms  in  the  illustrious  house  of  Hanover/'* 

These  declarations,  it  will  be  observed,  were  made 
with  specific  reference  to  the  insinuation  made  .in  the 
protest,  that  these  brethren  did  not  conform  to  the 
Acts  of  1729,  and  1736. 

Ten  ministers  withdrew  with  the  Kew  Side  party ; 
of  whom  but  two  were  from  'Ne^Y  England.  Dickin- 
son and  the  rest  of  the  Eastern  members,  whilst  rejoic- 
ing in  the  work  of  grace  wrought  through  the  instru- 
mentality of  the  New  Brunswick  brethren,  disapproved 
of  the  disorders  with  which  they  were  chargeable ;  and 
had  cordially  concurred  in  the  propriety  of  the  acts,  on 
mtrusion,  and  the  examination  of  candidates.  But, 
regarding  the  proceedings,  by  which  those  members  had 
been  separated  from  the  Synod,  as  being  irregular  and 
disorderly,  they  labored,  for  some  years,  to  induce  the 
Philadelphia  Synod  to  recognize  and  readmit  them. 
At  length,  failing  in  this,  tliey  determined  to  retire 
from  the  Synod,  and  join  with  the  New  Brunsvfick 
brethren,  who  had,  in  the  mean  time,  been  led  to  a 
juster  view  of  the  impropriety  of  many  of  their  former 
proceedings. 

The  New  York  members,  therefore,  having  applied 
for  and  received  the  consent  of  the  Synod  to  their  so 
doing,  amicably  withdrew,  in  1745,  and  united  with 
the  excluded  brethren  in  erecting  the  Synod  of  New 
York.  In  forming  this  union,  however,  they  were 
careful  to  incorporate  in  its  terms  a  distinct  assertion  of 
the  authority  of  the  Confession  of  Faith,  and  a  repudia- 
*  Hodge,  ii.,  p.  229 ;  Digest,  p.  33. 


THE    NEW    SIDE   SCHISM.  105 

tion  of  the  disorderly  principles  and  practices  Avhich 
bad  led  to  the  division. 

This  subscription,  thus  enforced  by  Dickinson  and 
the  New  York  brethren  upon  the  New  Brunswick 
men,  is  the  more  significant,  in  view  of  the  .position 
taken  by  him  on  the  subject,  at  the  time  of  the  Adopt- 
ing Act. 

"  1 .  They  agree  that  the  Westminister  Confession  of 
Faith,  with  the  Larger  and  Shorter  Catechisms,  be  the 
public  confession  of  their  faith,  in  such  manner  as  vmxs 
agreed  unto  by  the  Synod  of  Philadelphia,  in  the  year 
1729  ;  and  to  be  inserted  in  the  latter  end  of  this  book. 
And  they  declare  their  approbation  of  the  Directory  of 
the  Assembly  of  Divines  at  Westminister,  as  the 
general  plan  of  worship  and  discipline.'^ 

"  2.  They  agree  that  in  matters  of  discipline,  and 
those  things  that  relate  to  the  peace  and  good  order  of 
our  churches,  they  shall  be  determined  according  to  the 
major  vote  of  Ministers  and  Elders  ;  with  which  vote 
every  member  shall  actively  concur  or  pacifically  ac- 
quiesce ;"*  and  if  any  one  cannot  conscientiously  do  so, 
in  a  case  deemed  necessary  by  the  Synod,  he  shall  peace- 
ably withdraAV,  without  disputation  or  contention. 

From  the  history  thus  carefully  traced,  it  is  evident 
that  Blair  did  not  speak  ignorantly,  nor  without  con- 
sideration, when  he  so  emphatically  denied  the  assertion 
of  Craighead,  that  the  minute  of  1736  was  false,  as  to 
the  intention  of  the  Act  of  1729.  It  also  appears  that 
the  unequivocal  language  of  the  expository  minute  was 
not  too  strict  for  the  New  Side  men,  the  only  ones  whom 
it  can  be  supposed  to  have  oifended.     In  full  view  of 

*  Eecords,  p.  233. 


106  HISTORY   OF   THE  NEW  SCHOOL. 

it,  they  declare  that  they  adopt  the  Westminster  stand- 
ards, as  fully  as  the  Synod  of  Philadelphia  had  ever 
done.  They,  thus  stand  voluntarily  and  fully  com- 
mitted to  the  strictest  rule  of  subscription.  "  Substance 
of  doctrine"  had  no  favor  with  them. 

At  a  subsequent  date,  the  Synod  of  New  York 
adopted  a  minute  designed  to  obviate  misapprehensions 
among  the  Dutch  churches  : — "  We  do  hereby  declare 
and  testify  our  constitution,,  order,  and  discipline  to  be 
in«  harmony  with  the  Established  Church  of  Scotland. 
The  Westminster  Confession,  Catechisms,  and  Directory 
for  Public  AYorship  and  Church  Government,  adopted 
by  them,  are  in  like  manner  adopted  by  us.  We  de- 
clare ourselves  united  with  that  Church,  in  the' same 
faith,  order,  and  discipline.  Its  approbation,  counten- 
ance, and  favor,  we  have  abundant  testimonies  of. 
They,  as  brethren,  receive  us;  and  their  members 
we,  in  like  manner,  as  opportunity  offers,  receive  as 
ours,''  etc.'^ 

Again,  the  Synod  replied  to  an  insulting  letter  from 
some  disaffected  members, — ^^  Though  we  might  justly 
refuse  to  take  any  further  notice  of  what  is  offered  in 
said  paper,  yet  as  we  would  condescend  to  the  weakness, 
and,  as  far  as  can  consist  with  duty,  bear  with  the  im- 
perfections, of  those  who  are  under  our  care,  for  the 
sake  of  their  edification ;  we  therefore  inform  them, 
that,  by  adopting  the  Westminster  Confession,  we  only 
intend  receiving  it  as  a  test  of  orthodoxy  in  our 
Church  ;t  and  it  is  the  order  of  this  Synod,  that  all 

*  Records,  p.  245. 

f  It  was  expressly  as  "  a  test  of  orthodoxy"  that  the  New  England 
members  of  Synod  hesitated  to  adopt  the  Westminster  Confession, 


THE   NEW   SIDE   SCHISM.  107 

who  are  licensed  to  preach  the  gospel,  or  become  mem- 
bers of  any  Presbytery  in  our  bounds,  shall  receive  the 
same  as  the  confession  of  their  faith,  according  to  our 
constituting  act;  which  we  see  no  reason  to  repeal.'^''' 

The  affinity  of  the  Synod  to  the  Church  of  Scotland 
was  again  asserted,  in  a  letter  to  the  General  Assembly 
of  that  Church,  on  behalf  of  the  college  of  New  Jersey. 
In  it,  they  say, — "  Your  petitioners  conform  to  the  con- 
stitution of  the  Church  of  Scotland,  and  have  adopted 
her  standards  of  doctrine,  worship,  and  discipline.^' 
And  unfolding  their  necessities  they  ^'  most  earnestly 
pray  that  this  reverend  Assembly  would  afford  the  said 
college  all  the  countenance  and  assistance  in  their  power. 
The  young  daughter  of  the  Church  of  Scotland,  help- 
less and  exposed,  in  this  foreign  land,  cries  to  her  tender 
and  powerful  mother  for  relief.'^f 

Scotch  Presbyterianism  was  no  object  of  alarm  or 
repugnance  to  these  fathers  of  our  Church.  Their 
position,  on  this  question,  was  distinct^  defined  and 
consistently  maintained,  from  the  beginning. 

At  this  era  in  the  history,  occurs  a  curious  coinci- 
dence. New  England  seems  to  be  regarded  as  the  early 
patron  of  liberal  principles  of  subscription.  At  New 
Haven,  the  officers  of  the  college  had,  heretofore,  been 
required  to  give  their  strict  adoption  of  the  Saybrook 
Platform,  which  included  the  Savoy  Confession.  But 
now,  in  1753,  five  years  before  the  reunion  of  the 
divided  Synod,  not  only  the  officers,  but  the  Trustees 
of  the  college,  were  required  to  subscribe  the  Westmin- 

when  that  measure  was   originally  proposed ;    as  we   have   already 
seen. 
*  Kecords,  p.  274.  f  Letter,  in  Kecords,  p.  257. 


108  HISTORY   OF   THE  NEW  SCHOOL. 

ster  Confession  and  Catechisms,  in  the  most  unqualified 
sense,  and  to  renounce  all  doctrines  and  principles  con- 
trary thereto.  No  class  of  Presbyterians,  Scotch  or 
American,  ever  were  more  rigid,  on  this  point,  than  the 
New  England  churches,  in  all  their  history,  prior  to  the 
rise  of  the  school  of  Edwards. 


I 


CHAPTER    VII. 

LATER   DOCTEINAL   HISTORY. 

Old  Side  subscription — Amicable  withdrawal  of  the  New  York  mem- 
bers— Correspondence  opened  between  the  Synods — New  York  pro- 
posals for  reunion — Conference  of  commissioners — "  That  paragraph 
about  essentials" — Doctrinal  errors  charged  on  the  New  Side — • 
Proposed  testimony  to  the  revival — "  That  paragraph"  had  refer- 
ence to  acts  of  church  courts — The  New  Side  affiliated  with  Scot- 
land— The  doctrinal  basis  of  reunion — Controversy  of  Tennent 
and  Cowell,  on  the  motives  of  seeking  God — Barker's  doctrinal 
errors — His  book  censured — He  is  suspended  from  the  ministry — 
Doctrinal  position  stated  in  the  ecclesiastical  convention  of  1785 — 
Authority  of  the  Synod — Adoption  of  the  Confession,  after  the 
revision  of  1788. 

Of  the  sentiments  of  the  Old  Side  Synod  of  Phila- 
delphia, it  is  scarcely  necessary  to  speak.  None  ques- 
tion their  strict  conformity  to  the  Scotch  type.  Imme- 
diately upon  the  withdrawal  of  the  New  Side,  in  1741, 
it  was  "  overtured,  That  every  member  of  this  Synod, 
whether  minister  or  elder,  do  sincerely  and  heartily 
receive,  own,  acknowledge,  and  subscribe,  the  Westmin- 
ster Confession  of  Faith  and  Larger  and  Shorter  Cate- 
chisms, as  the  confession  of  his  faith;  and  the  Directory, 
as  far  as  circumstances  will  allow  and  admit,  in  this 
infant  Church,  for  the  rule  of  church  order.  Ordered 
that  every  session  do  oblige  their  elders,  at  their  admis- 
sion to  do  the  same. 

10  109 


110  HISTORY   OF   THE  NEW  SCHOOL. 

"  This  was  readily  approved,  nemine  contradicenteJ'* 

When  the  Xew  York  members,  with  the  consent  of 
the  Philadelphia  Synod,  withdrew,  to  nnite  witli  the 
other  party,  one  of  the  motives  determining  their  action 
undonbtedly  was,  to  facilitate  the  reunion  of  the  two 
bodies.  In  submitting  their  proposal  to  separate,  they 
say  : — "  This  they  desire  to  do,  with  the  consent  of  this 
body,  that  they  may  not  be  thought  to  set  up,  and  act 
in  opposition  to  this,  and  that  there  may  be  a  founda- 
tion for  the  two  Synods  to  consult  and  act  in  mutual 
concert  with  one  another  hereafter,  and  maintain  love 
and  brotherly  kindness  with  each  other.'^f 

The  Synod  replied,  that,  ''  though  we  judge  they 
have  no  just  ground  to  withdraw  from  us,  yet  seeing 
they  propose  to  erect  themselves  into  a  Synod  at 
New  York,  and  now  desire  to  do  this  in  the  most 
friendly  manner  possible,  we  declare,  if  they  or  any  of 
them  do  so,  we  shall  endeavor  to  maintain  charitable 
and  Christian  affections  toward  them,  and  show  the 
same,  upon  all  occasions,  by  such  correspondence  and 
fellowship  as  we  shall  think  duty,  and  consistent  with 
a  good  conscience."! 

In  accordance  with  the  intention  thus  expressed,  the 
Synod  of  New  York  at  its  first  meeting  appointed  a 
committee,  to  correspond  with  the  Synod  of  Philadel- 
phia, which  promptly  responded  to  their  communi- 
cation. § 

In  pursuance  of  the  same  pacific  policy,  an  overture 
was  introduced  into  the  New  York  Synod,  and  adopted, 
in  1749,  proposing  that  negotiations  be  opened  with  the 

*  Eecords,  p.  159.  f  Ibid.,  p.  181. 

J  Ibid.,  p.  181.  g  Ibid.,  p.  234. 


LATER   DOCTRINAL   HISTORY.  Ill 

Philadelphia  Synod,  upon  the  following  fundamental 
terms. 

"  1 .  To  preserve  the  common  peace,  we  would  pro- 
pose, that  all  names  of  distinction,  which  have  been 
made  use  of,  in  the  late  times,  be  for  ever  abolished. 

"  2.  That  every  member  assent  unto  and  adopt  the 
Confession  of  Faith  and  Directory,  according  to  the 
plan  formerly  agreed  to  by  the  Synod  of  Philadelphia 
in  the  years . 

'^  3.  That  every  member  promise,  that  after  any  ques- 
tion has  been  determined  by  the  major  vote,  he  will 
actively  concur  or  passively  submit  to  the  judgment  of 
the  body ;  but  if  his  conscience  permit  him  to  do  neither 
of  these,  that  then  he  shall  be  obliged  peaceably  to 
withdraw  from  our  Synodical  communion,  without  any 
attempt  to  make  a  schism  or  division  among  us.  Yet 
this  is  not  intended  to  extend  to  any  cases  but  those 
which  the  Synod  judges  essential,  in  matters  of  doctrine 
or  discipline. 

"  4.  That  all  our  respective  congregations  and  vacan- 
cies be  acknowledged  as  congregations  belonging  to  the 
Synod,  but  continue  under  the  care  of  the  same  Presby- 
tery as  now  they  are,  until  a  favorable  opportunity 
presents  for  an  advantageous  alteration. 

"  5.  That  we  all  agree  to  esteem  and  treat  it  as  a 
censurable  evil,  to  accuse  any  of  our  members  of  error 
in  doctrine  or  immorality  in  conversation,  any  other- 
wise than  by  private  reproof;  till  the  accusation  has 
been  brought  before  a  regular  judicature,  and  issued 
according  to  the  known  rules  of  our  discipline.^'* 

In  conformity  with  this  overture,  committees  of  the 

*  Eecords,  p.  239. 


112  HISTORY   OF   THE  NEW  SCHOOL. 

two  Synods  met.  But  the  New  York  brethren,  waiv- 
ing all  other  matters,  immediately  insisted  that  the 
protest  of  1741  should,  by  some  authentic  and  formal 
act  of  the  Synod  of  Philadelphia,  be  made  null  and 
void.  The  result  was  a  heated  discussion,  and  a  refer- 
ence to  the  respective  Synods,  to  prepare  and  exchange, 
at  their  next  sessions,  specific  proposals  for  union.  "  At 
the  same  time,  these  three  principal  things  were  espe- 
cially recommended  to  the  consideration  of  the  respect- 
ive Synods.  1.  The  protest.  2.  That  paragraph  about 
essentials.     3.  Of  Presbyteries.^'* 

"  That  paragraph  about  essentials,"  has  been  sup- 
posed to  allude  to  the  Preliminary  Act  of  1729.  But 
there  is,  here,  no  allusion  to  that  paper.  The  phrase 
refers  to  the  above  third  article  of  the  fundamental 
terms  proposed  by  the  New  York  Synod,  as  the  basis 
of  negotiation.  The  point  presented  in  that  article 
involved  the  principle  on  which  the  New  Brunswick 
brethren  had  been  excluded ;  and  presented,  therefore, 
a  material  point  to  be  adjusted,  before  reunion. 

As  we  have  already  seen,  the  Old  Side  had  charged 
the  New  with  doctrinal  error ;  and,  on  that  ground, 
held  them  bound  to  withdraw,  as  having  forfeited  their 
right  to  sit  in  the  Synod.  But  wherein  did  these  doc- 
trinal errors  consist?  In  the  use  of  some  unouarded 
expressions,  as  to  the  necessity  of  "  preparatory  ungra- 
cious convictions,'^  in  order  to  conversion ;  assurance 
of  grace,  which  the  believer  must  possess ;  a  conscious- 
ness of  the  time  of  his  conversion ;  and  the  rights  of 
conscience,  in  opposition  to  the  authority  of  the  Church, 
etc.;  points  upon  which  diversity  disappeared,  as  soon 

*  Kecords,  p.  241. 


LATER   DOCTRINAL   HISTORY.  113 

as  the  excitement  had  cooled,  and  men  came  to  a  dis- 
passionate estimate  of  each  other's  language.  When 
the  negotiations  for  union  took  place,  the  only  differ- 
ence of  "  doctrine"  that  survived  was,  as  to  the  nature 
of  the  work,  of  whicli  the  churches  had  been  recent 
witnesses.  While  the  one  party,  looking  only  to  the 
blessed  results,  in  conversions  multiplied,  did  not  hesi- 
tate to  pronounce  it  a  glorious  work  of  God's  grace, — 
the  others,  looking  too  exclusively  upon  the  unhappy 
concomitants,  declared  themselves  unable  to  join  in  the 
high  testimony,  which  their  brethren  earnestly  sought 
to  elicit  from  them.  ^^  You  seem  to  insist,"  said  they, 
'^  on  a  joint  testimony  for  such  a  glorious  work  of  God, 
in  the  late  religious  aj^pearances,  as  a  term  of  union ; 
by  making  it  one  of  your  proposals  for  peace  and  union, 
that  you  hope  both  Synods  will  go  into  such  a  testi- 
mony. How  is  this  consistent  with  your  former  pro- 
fessed sentiments  of  the  duty  of  forbearance,  in  said 
case,  and  with  your  declared  sentiments,  that  no  diifer- 
ence  in  judgment,  in  cases  of  plain  sin  and  duty,  and 
opinions  relating  to  the  great  truths  of  religion,  is  suf- 
ficient reason  Avhy  the  differing  member  should  be 
obliged  to  withdraw,  unless  the  said  plain  duty  or  truth 
be  judged,  by  the  body,  to  be  essential,  in  doctrine  or 
discipline  ?"* 

To  this,  the  New  York  Synod  replied,  that  there  was 
no  inconsistency  between  their  hoping  to  secure  a  joint 
testimony  and  '^  their  declared  sentiments  that  difference 
in  judgment  should  not  oblige  a  dissenting  member  to 
withdraw  from  our  communion ;  unless  the  matter  were 
judged,  by  the  body,  to  be  essential  in  doctrine  or  dis- 

*  Kocords,  p.  207. 
10  «•    ' 


114  HISTORY   OF   THE  NEW  SCHOOL. 

cipline.  And  this  we  must  own  is  an  important  article 
with  us,  which  we  cannot  any  way  dispense  with ;  and 
it  appears  to  us  to  be  strictly  Christian  and  scriptural, 
as  well  as  Presbyterian ;  otherwise,  we  must  make 
everything  that  appears  plain  duty  to  us,  a  term  of  com- 
munion, which,  we  apprehend,  the  Scripture  prohibits. 
And  it  appears  plain  to  us,  that  there  may  be  many 
opinions  relating  to  the  great  truths  of  religion,  that  are 
not  great  themselves,  nor  of  sufficient  importance  to  be 
made  terms  of  communion.  Nor  can  these  sentiments 
^^open  the  door  to  an  unjustifiable  latitude  in  principles 
and  practices,"  any  more  than  the  apostolic  prohibition 
of  receiving  them  that  are  weak  to  doubtful  disputa- 
tions. What  is  plain  sin  and  plain  duty,  in  one's  ac- 
count, is  not  in  another's ;  and  J;he  Synod  has  still  in 
their  power  to  judge  what  is  essential  and  what  is  not."* 
In  a  word,  the  question  involved  in  these  discussions, 
was  not  with  respect  to  points  of  doctrinal  theology,  in 
the  ordinary  acceptation  of  the  term,  as  those  doctrines 
are  defined  in  the  Confession ;  but  as  to  questions  of 
duty  arising,  from  time  to  time,  in  the  changing  circum- 
stances of  the  Church,  such  as  those  that  connected 
themselves  with  the  former  state  of  awakening ;  and 
opinions  on  such  questions  as  those  mentioned  above, 
opinions  which  have  no  formal  determination  in  the 
Confession.  In  fact  the  whole  discussion  grew  out  of 
"  that  paragraph"  in  the  New  York  fundamental  terms, 
above  cited,  and  related  to  acquiescence  in  decisions, — 
not,  of  the  Confession, — but,  of  the  judicatories  of  the 
Church,  upon  questions  arising  in  the  course  of  their 
administration. 

*  Eecords,  p^  254. 


LATER   DOCTRINAL   HISTORY.  115 

It  is  to  be  remembered,  that  it  was  pending  these 
very  discussions  between  the  two  Synods,  that  the  Synod 
of  New  York  affiliated  itself,  as  we  have  seen,  with  the 
Church  of  Scotland,  having  already  conjmitted  itself,  so 
fully  and  variously,  to  the  strictest  maintenance  of  the 
doctrines  of  the  AYestminster  standards. 

The  result  of  the  negotiations  betAveen  the  Synods 
was  their  reunion,  in  1758,  on  a  basis  which  exhibits 
the  "paragraph  about  essentials,^^  in  its  true  position, 
and  contained  a  recognition  of  the  Westminster  stand- 
ards, even  much  stricter  than  that  passed  by  the  Synod 
of  Philadelphia,  immediately  after  the  separation.  The 
latter  it  will  be  remembered,  was  adopted,  in  response 
to  the  demand  of  the  protestants,  that  the  Acts  of  1729 
and  1736  should  be  enforced  on  all  members  of  the 
Synod.  The  following  are  three  of  the  articles  of  re- 
union of  1758. 

"  I.  Both  Synods,  having  always  approved  and  re- 
ceived the  Westminster  Confession  of  Faith,  and  Larger 
and  Shorter  Catechisms,  as  an  orthodox  and  excellent 
system  of  Christian  doctrine,  founded  on  the  Word  of 
God,  we  do  still  receive  the  same  as  the  confession  of 
our  faith,  and  also  adhere  to  the  plan  of  worship,  gov- 
ernment, and  discipline,  contained  in  the  Westminster 
Directory;  strictly  enjoining  it  on  all  our  members  and  1} 
probationers  for  the  ministry,  that  they  teach  and  preach 
according  to  the  form  of  sound  words  in  said  Confession 
and  Catechisms,  and  avoid  and  oppose  all  errors  con- 
trary thereto. 

"  II.  That,  when  any  matter  is  determined,  by  a 
major  vote,  every  member  shall  either  actively  concur 
with,  or  passively  submit  to,  such  determination ;  or,  if, 


116  HISTORY   OF   THE  NEW  SCHOOL. 

his  conscience  j)ermit  him  to  do  neither,  he  shall, — after 
sufficient  liberty  modestly  to  reason  and  remonstrate, — 
peaceably  withdraw  from  our  communion,  Avithout  at- 
tempting to  make  any  schism.  Provided,  always,  that 
this  shall  be  understood  to  extend  only  to  such  determi- 
nations as  the  body  shall  judge  indispensable  in  doctrine 
or  Presbyterian  government. 

"VI.  That  no  Presbytery  shall  license  or  ordain,  to 
the  work  of  the  ministry,  any  candidate,  until  he  give 
/  ^\  them  competent  satisfliction,  as  to  his  learning,  and  ex- 
perimental acquaintance  with  religion,  and  skill  in 
divinity  and  cases  of  conscience;  and  declare  his  ac- 
ceptance of  the  Westminster  Confession  and  Catechisms 
.  -v,  >^  as  the  confession  of  his  faith,  and  promise  subjection  to 
the  Presbyterian  plan  of  government  in  the  Westmins- 
ter Directory."* 

Another  element  of  the  evidence,  as  to  the  theology 
of  this  period,  is  found  in  the  two  cases  of  doctrinal 
controversy,  which  arose  and  were  adjudicated  by  the 
Synod.  They  illustrate,  in  a  very  striking  manner,  the 
strictness  of  the  doctrinal  j^osition  maintained. 

The  first  of  these  originated  in  some  speculations  of 
a  minister  from  New  England,  on  a  subject  which  has 
been  much  discussed  in  that  region, — the  lawfulness  of 
seeking  our  eternal  happiness  from  selfish  motives. 
Gilbert  Tennent  was  the  life  and  soul  of  the  New  Side 
2)arty, — the  party  supposed  to  be  advocates  for  liberal 
terms  of  subscription.  Yet  he  it  was  who  assailed 
Co  well  for  unsoundness  on  this  subject,  and  brought 
him  before  the  bar  of  Synod,  on  that  ground. 

The  Ilev.  David  Co  well  had  been  called  to  the  church 

*  Eecords,  p.  286. 


LATER   DOCTRINAL   HISTORY.  117 

in  Trenton.  Upon  his  trials  for  ordination,  he  submit- 
ted an  exegesis  on  the  question,  '■'•  An  lex  naturce  sit  siij/i- 
ciens  ad  salutem.^'  (Is  the  light  of  nature  sufficient  to 
salvation?)*  Perhaps,  in  this  paper,  or  in  the  examina- 
tion which  followed,  he  expressed  himself  in  such  terms 
as  led  to  the  imputation  that  he  held  tliat  self-love  is  U 
the  foundation  of,  all  obedience.  Tennent  opened  a  cor- 
respondence with  him,  on  the  subject ;  and,  after  a  pro- 
tracted discussion,  called  the  attention  of  the  Synod  to 
the  matter. 

That  body  referred  it  to  a  committee,  at  the  head  of 
which  was  Dickinson.  The  committee  reported,  that 
thouo:li  there  were  some  incautious  and  un2:uarded 
expressions  used  by  both  the  contending  parties,  yet 
they  have  ground  to  hope  "  that  the  principal  contro- 
versy between  them  flow^s  from  their  not  having  clear 
ideas  of  the  subject  they  so  earnestly  debate  about.^' 
The  committee  then  proceeded  to  make  a  statement  of 
doctrine  on  the  subject ;  to  which  both  parties  declared 
their  assent,  and  the  matter  was  dropped.  The  next 
year,  however,  Tennent  declared  himself  dissatisfied 
with  the  conclusion  of  the  affair,  and  requested  that  it 
be  reopened ;  which  the  Synod  declined  to  do.  This 
was  in  1749;  and,  at  the  same  meeting,  Mr.  Tennent 
made  this  one  of  the  principal  grounds  on  whicli,  in  a 
paper,  read  by  him  to  the  Synod,  he  declared  his  suspi- 
cions that  some  of  the  members  were  unconverted. — 
"  First,  their  unsoundness  in  some  principal  doctrines 
of  Christianity,  that  relate  to  experience  and  practice ; 
as,  particularly,  in  the  following  points  : — 

"  1st.  That  there  is  no  distinction  between  the  glory 
*  Hall's  History  of  the  Presbyterian  Church  in  Trenton,  p.  70. 


118  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

of  God  and  our  happiness ; — that  self-love  is  the  foun- 
dation of  all  obedience.  .  .  . 

*^  2d,  That  there  is  a  certainty  of  salvation  annexed 
to  the  labors  of  natural  men.'^  .  .  . 

Of  these  points,  Thomson  justly  says,  "Although  I 
will  not  take  upon  me  to  justify  these  expressions,  as 
sound,  in  their  most  obvious  meaning,  yet  I  tliink  it's 
a  very  strange  stretch  of  censoriousness  and  rash  judg- 
ing, to  conclude  the  person  unregenerate  who  useth 
them."* 

But,  judged  by  this  criterion,  and  that  of  Tennent's 
published  works,  what  would  have  been  his  voice,  as  to 
unessential  doctrines  ?  What  feature  of  recent  im- 
provements upon  the  Westminster  system  would  he 
have  tolerated,  under  that  head  ? 

The  other  case  of  doctrinal  controversy,  originated  in 
New  Brunswick  Presbytery,  in  1758,  just  before  the  re- 
union. The  Kev.  Samuel  Harker  was  charged  with 
having  vented  some  erroneous  doctrines,  and  the  case 
was  referred  to  the  Synod  of  New  York,  by  which  a 
committee  was  appointed  to  deal  with  him,  as  they 
should  have  opportunity,  for  his  conviction.  Every 
member  of  this  committee  belonged  to  the  original  New 
Side  party.  The  efforts  of  the  Synod  were  ineffectually 
continued,  for  five  years  after  the  union,  to  recover  this 
member.  In  the  mean  time,  he  published  a  book  enti- 
tled, "All  Appeal  to  the  Christian  AVorld,''t  in  which 
his  sentiments  were  developed.  This  book  was,  by  the 
Synod  in  1762,  referred  to  a  committee,  to  examine  and 
report  upon  it.     They  rejDorted  the  next  year,  where- 

*  Thomson's  Church  Government,  pp.  9,  11. 
t  Webster,  p.  G23. 


LATER   DOCTEINAL   HISTORY.  119 

upon  '^  the  Synod  proceeded  to  consider  Mr.  Harker's 
principles^  collected  from  his  book,  by  the  committee, 
which  are  in  substance  as  follows : 

'^  1.  That  the  covenant  of  grace  is  in  such  a  sense 
conditional,  that  fallen  mankind,  in  their  unregenerate 
state,  by  the  general  assistance  given  to  all  under  the 
gosjicl,  have  a  sufficient  ability  to  fulfill  the  conditions 
thereof,  and  so,  by  their  own  endeavors  to  ensure  to 
themselves  regenerating  grace  and  all  saving  blessings. 

"  2.  That  God  has  bound  himself  by  promise,  to 
give  them  regenerating  grace,  upon  their  fulfilling  what 
he,  (Mr.  Harker,)  calls,  the  direct  conditions  of  obtain- 
ing it ;  and,  upon  the  whole,  makes  a  certain  and  an 
infallible  connection  between  their  endeavors  and  the 
aforesaid  blessings. 

"  3.  That  GocVs  prescience  of  future  events,  is  previ- 
ous to  and  not  dependent  on  his  decrees ;  that  his 
decrees  have  no  influence  on  his  own  conduct,  and  that 
the  foresight  of  faith  was  the  ground  of  the  decree  of 
election. 

"  It  is  further  observed,  that  he  often  uses  inaccurate, 
unintelligible,  and  dangerous,  modes  of  expression,  that 
tend  to  lead  people  into  false  notions  of  several  import- 
ant matters ;  as,  that  Adam  was  the  federal  father  of 
his  posterity,  in  the  second  covenant,  as  well  as  in  the 
first ;  that  the  regenerate  are  not  in  a  state  of  probation 
for  heaven ;  and  several  such  like. 

"  The  Synod  judge  that  these  principles  are  of  a  hurt- 
ful and  dangerous  tendency,  giving  a  false  view  to  the 
covenant  of  grace,  perverting  it  into  a  new  modeled 
covenant  of  works,  and  misrepresents  the  doctrine  of 
the   divine   decrees,   as   held-  by   the   best    Reformed 


120  HISTOEY   OF   THE   ]S'EW   SCHOOL. 

Churches ;  and,  in   fine,  are  contrary  to  the  Word  of 
God  and  our  approved  standards  of  doctrine.'^* 

The  Synod  called  in  Mr.  Harker,  and  ^^  questioned 
him  in  many  particulars ;"  and,  after  mature  delibera- 
tion, suspended  him  from  the  ministry,  and  ordered 
^^  that  all  be  duly  warned  not  to  receive  his  doctrines, 
nor  admit  his  ministrations,  until  it  shall  please  God  to 
convince  him  of  his  mistakes,  and  to  bring  him  to  the 
acknowledgment  of  the  truth,  and  recover  him  from  the 
error  of  his  ways.'^f 

It  would  seem  an  easy  matter  to  decide,  from  these 
two  judicial  cases,  alone,  as  to  the  attitude  of  the 
Ghurch,  at  that  time,  on  the  question  involved  in  the 
phrasing  of  the  Preliminary  Act. 

There  was  a  signal  occasion  in  her  subsequent  his- 
tory, when  the  Synod  was  called  upon,  in  a  most 
responsible  manner,  to  declare  herself  on, this  point. 

In  October,  1785,  a  convention  met  at  New  York, 
composed  of  commissioners  from  the  Reformed  Dutch, 
the  Associate  Reformed,  and  the  Presbyterian  Synods, 
for  the  purpose  of  making  arrangements  for  more  inti- 
mate relations  between  the  severaF  bodies.  At  this 
convention  the  Reformed  Dutch  committee  asked  for  an 
explicit  statement,  by  each  committee,  of  the  ^formulas 
of  doctrine  and  worship  received  by  the  churches,  seve- 
rally. The  commissioners  of  the  Synod  of  New  York 
and  Philadelj^hia  were  Drs.  John  Rodgers,  Alexander 
McAVhorter,  and  Samuel  Smith,  and  Rev.  INIessrs. 
Nathan  Kerr,  and  John  Woodhull ;  men  surely  compe- 
tent to  speak  on  the  subject.  Their  answer  was  ap- 
proved by  the  Synod,  and  was  in  the  following  terms  : 
*  Eecords,  p.  329.  f  Ibid,  p.  329. 


LATEE   DOCTRINAL   HISTOEY.  121 

"  The  Synod  of  IsTew  York  and  Philadelphia  adopt, 
according  to  the  known  and  established  meaning  of  the 
terms,  the  Westminister  Confession  of  Faith  as  the 
confession  of  their  faith ;  save  that  every  candidate  for 
the  gospel  ministry  is  permitted  to  except  against  so 
much  of  the  twenty-third  chapter  as  gives  authority  to 
civil  magistrates  in  matters  of  religion.  The  Presby- 
terian Church  in  America  considers  the  Church  of  Christ 
as  a  spiritual  society,  entirely  distinct  from  the  civil  // 
government,  having  a  right  to  regulate  their  own  eccle- 
siastical policy,  independently  of  the  interposition  of 
the  magistrate. 

**  The  Synod  also  receives  the  Directory  for  public 
worship  and  the  form  of  Church  Government,  recom- 
mended by  the  Westminster  Assembly,  as  in  substance 
agreeable  to  the  institutions  of  the  New  Testament. 
This  mode  of  adojotion  we  use,  because  we  believe  the 
general  ]3latfbrm  of  our  government  to  be  agreeable  to 
the  sacred  Scriptures ;  but  we  do  not  believe  that  God 
has  been  pleased  so  to  reveal  and  enjoin  every  minute 
circumstance  of  ecclesiastical  government  and  discipline, 
as  not  to  leave  roo^n  for  orthodox  churches  of  Christ,  in 
these  minutse,  to  differ,  with  charity,  from  one  another. 

"  The  rules  of  our  discipline  and  the  form  of  process 
in  our  church  judicatures,  are  contained  in  Pardovan's 
(alias  Steuart's)  Collections,  in  conjunction  with  the 
acts  of  our  own  Synod ;  the  power  of  which,  in  matters 
purely  ecclesiastical,  we  consider  as  equal  to  the  power 
of  any  Synod  or  General  Assembly  in  the  world.  Our 
church  judicatures,  like  those  of  the  Church  of  Scot- 
land, from  which  we  derive  our  origin,  are  church 
Sessions,  Presbyteries  and  Synods :  to  which  it  is 
11 


122  HISTORY   OF   THE   KEW   SCHOOL. 

now  in  contemplation   to   add  a  ^National  or   General 
Assembly."* 

Here  is  a  distinct  recognition  of  the  authority  of  the 
Confession^  in  the  sense  of  the  minute  of  1736 ; 
and  a  further  most  significant  discrimination  between 
the  standards  of  doctrine  and  the  rules  of  govern- 
ment. The  latter  may  be  adopted  by  candidates  ^'  for 
substance.''  But  no  such  liberty  is  allowed  respecting 
the  former. 

In  this  paper,  the  Synod  reports  the  contemplated 
erection  of  a  General  Assembly.  It  was,  at  the  time, 
engaged  in  a  revision  of  the  standards,  with  that  view ; 
and  the  above  statement  is  of  peculiar  significance  in  its 
bearing  upon  the  events  immediately  following. 

In  the  revision,  the  excepted  clauses  were  corrected, 
and  after  amendment  of  the  Form  of  Government,  and 
the  Directory,  the  whole  was  adopted  as  the  Constitution 
of  our  Church,  the  Confession  of  our  faith,  and  the 
^^  standard  of  our  doctrine,  government  discipline,  and 
worship."t 

The  .purpose  of  this  laborious  inquiry  has  been  to 
ascertain,  from  the  authentic  records,  what  has  been  the 
real  attitude  of  our  Church,  as  to  the  doctrines  set  forth 
in  her  standards.  Has  she  received  them  strictly,  as 
being  a  true  and  reliable  exposition  of  the  teachings  of 
the  Scriptures,  in  accordance  with  which  she  would 
have  her  people  instructed,  and  her  testimony  main- 
tained before  the  world  ?  Or,  has  she  held  them  as  the 
point  of  departure ;  from  the  definitions  of  which  her 
ministers  are  at  liberty  to  diverge,  according  to  the 
vagaries  of  their  own  fancies,  provided  they  do  not 
*  Kecords,  p.  518.  f  Ibid.,  p.  547. 


LATER   DOCTRINAL    HISTORY.  123 

depart  "  essentially"  from  the  system  of  truth.  In  a 
word,  are  they  criteria  of  the  orthodoxy  of  our  ministry 
and  the  fidelity  of  their  teachings  ;  and,  if  they  are 
not,  how  are  the  courts  of  the  Church  to  determine 
what  she  holds  to  be  necessary  and  essential,  and  what 
she  allows  to  be  indifferent ;  who  are  orthodox,  and 
who  heretical  ? 

The  facts  are,  that  even  the  Preliminary  Act  did  not  | 
allow  any  divergence,  whatever,   from    the   standards, 
without  submitting  it  to  the  courts  of  the  Church,  and 
conforming  to  their  judgment  respecting  it ; — that  the' 
minute  of  1736,  is  in  perfect  harmony  with  the  face  of 
the  record  of  1729 ;  that  it  was  confessedly   enforced 
until  the  division ;  that  the  Old  Side  party  always  ad- 
hered to  it,  and  the  Xew  Side  with  reiterated  emphasis 
endorse  it;  and  that,  in  1785,  it  was  recognized,  with- 
out question,  as  the  established  and  universal  law  of  the 
Church.     The  Eev.  Samuel  Blair,  in  1741,  hall  never; 
heard  of  a  minister  of  the  Synod  who  scrupled  anything 
in  the  Confession,  except  the  clauses  as  to  the  magis-  \ 
irate.     Tennent   could    not   even    tolerate   a   crude   or 
ambiguous    sentiment,    on   the   efficacy  of  self-love   in 
impelling  men  to   seek   salvation :  and   when    Harker 
published  sentiments,   innocent,  compared  with  many 
which  now  find  harbor  under  the   Presbyterian  name, 
he  was,  apparently,  without  a  dissenting  voice,  excluded 
from  the  ministry. 


CHAPTER   VIII. 

THE     ASSEMBLY    AND     THE     CONFESSTOIS". 

* 

Organization  of  the  Assembly — Powers  of  the  General  Synod — 
Powers  of  the  General  Assembly — Constitution  of  the  Assembly — 
The  Barrier  Act — Articles  of  the  Constitution — The  Constitution 
did  not  emanate  from  tlie  Presbyteries — The  Barrier  Act  changed 
— Doctrinal  position  of  the  Assembly — Case  of  Balch — Craighead's 
doctrines — New  Light  schism — The  Cumberland  Presbytery — W. 
-  C.  Davis'  case — Case  of  Craighead — Doctrinal  attitude  of  the 
Church,  as  seen  in  these  histories. 

We  have  seen  the  origin  of  the  General  Presby- 
tery, about  1705,  and  its  expansion  in  1716,  into  a 
Synod,  having  charge  over  several  subordinate  Presby- 
teries. During  its  Sy nodical  existence,  as  before,  the 
body  usually  convened  in  ^^  full  Synod  ;''  but  it  some- 
times met  by  delegation  of  commissioners  from  the 
Presbyteries.  The  year  1788,  witnessed  a  further  ex- 
pansion of  the  system.  The  sixteen  Presbyteries,  into 
which  the  body  had  been  subdivided,  were  distributed 
into  four  Synods ;  the  name  of  the  supreme  court 
changed  to  the  General  Assembly,  and  provision  made 
in  the  Constitution  that  it  should  be  composed  of  com- 
missioners, of  equal  numbers  of  ministers  and  elders, 
elected  according  to  a  fixed  ratio  by  the  Presbyteries. 

Prior    to    this   change   in   the   constitution    of    the 
124 


THE   ASSEMBLY   AND   THE   CONFESSION.  125  * 

supreme  court  of  the  Church,  its  powers  had  been  un- 
limited by  any  constitutional  restrictions.  The  com- 
missioners of  the  Synod,  in  1786,  in  the  convention  with 
the  Dutch  and- Associate  Keformed  Cliurches,  asserted 
its  power  ^'  in  matters  purely  ecclesiastical,''  to  be 
"  equal  to  the  power  of  any  Synod  or  General  Assem- 
bly in  the  world.''*  This  representation  Avas  true,  and 
received  an  illustration  from  the  measures  then  in  pro- 
gress, for  the  reorganization  of  the  Church.  These 
consisted  in  a  revision  of  the  Confession  of  Faith  and 
Catechisms,  the  Form  of  Government,  Disci2)line  and 
Directory;  a  readjustment  of  the  Presbyteries;  the 
erection  of  four  Synods ;  and  the  reconstruction  of  the 
supreme  court  itself.  All  this  was  done  by  the  Synod, 
of  its  own  motion,  and  by  its  own  sole  and  supreme 
authority. 

In  this  process  of  revision,  however,  the  supreme 
court  was  divested  of  some  of  the  prerogatives  which  it 
had  previously  possessed.  The  necessity  of  this  grew 
out  of  the  change  in  the  composition  of  the  body.  It  *' 
was  no  longer  a  full  assembly  of  the  ministry  and  re- 
presentative elders  of  the  churches, .  but  a  delegation 
from  these,  ^f  And  yet,  as  the  court  representative  of  the 
whole  Church,  it  was  invested,  of  necessity,  with  the 
immediate  charge  of  her  highest  interests.  Careful 
provision  was,  therefore,  made  in  the  revised  Constitu- 
tion, in  two  respects,  to  secure  the  best  interests  of  the 
Church,  under  such  a  system,  from  possibly  corrupt  or . 
hasty  and  improvident  action  by  the  Assembly. 

The  first  of  these  had  resj^ect  to  the  constitution  of 

the  body  itself.     It  was  provided  that  '^  the  General 

*  Kecords,  p.  519. 
11* 


126  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

Assembly  shall  consist  of  an  equal  delegation  of  bishops 
and  elders  from  each  Presbytery,"  in  a  prescribed  ratio.* 
The  various  regulations  of  the  Constitution  determine 
that  the  qualifications  of  the  members  of  the  Assembly 
are, — constitutional  ordination  and  good  standing  in  the 
ministry  or  eldership  of  the  Church, — a  lawful  constitu- 
ency, that  is,  a  constitutional  Presbytery, — and  legal  elec- 
tion and  commission.  .  All  those  who  are  possessed  of 
these  qualifications, — they,  and  no  others,  are  authorized 
and  required  to  sit  in  the  Assembly,  ^'  to  consult,  vote,  and 
determine,  on  all  things  that  may  come  before  the  body, 
according  to  the  principles  of  the  Constitution  of  this 
Church,  and  the  Word  of  God.'' 

The  other  cautionary  provision,  contained  in  the 
revised  Constitution,  consisted  in  a  limitation  imposed 
upon  the  i30wers  of  the  Assembly.  In  the  early  strug- 
gles of  the  Church  of  Scotland  with  the  house  of  Stuart, 
she  was  greatly  embarrassed  by  the  action  of  Assemblies, 
in  which,  by  corruption  and  violence,  the  government 
had  secured  control.  By  them,  acts  and  regulations 
were  passed,  which  changed  the  Constitution,  and  bound 
the  Church  hand  and  foot,  and  placed  her  at  the  dis- 
position of  the  king  and  his  ministry.  When,  after- 
ward, the  liberties  of  the  Church  were  recovered,  the 
Barrier  Act  was  passed,  as  a  protection  against  similar 
attempts.  This  Act  provided  that  "  before  a  General 
Assembly  of  this  Church  pass  any  acts  which  are  to  be 
binding  rules  and  constitutions  to  the  Church,  the  same 
Acts  be  first  j^roposed  as  overtures  to  tlie  Assembly; 
and,  being  passed,  as  such,  be  remitted  to  the  considera- 
tion  of  the  several   Presbyteries  of  tlie   Church,  and 

*  Form  of  Government,  xii.  2. 


THE   ASSEMBLY   AND   THE   CONFESSION.  127 

their  opinions  and  consent  reported  to  the  next  Assem- 
bly, following ;  who  may  then  pass  the  same  into  Acts, 
if  the  more  general  opinion  of  the  Church,  thus  had, 
agree  thereto."* 

This  Act  was,  by  the  General  Synod,  transcribed  into 
the  revised  Constitution,  and  defined  as  a  "  restriction 
upon  the  powers  of  the  Assembly." 

In  another  respect,  the  Assembly  was  divested  of 
powers  possessed  by  the  Synod.  That  body,  whilst 
modeling  the  Constitution  at  its  own  discretion,  pro- 
vided that' the  book,  as  thus  amended,  should  continue 
to  be  the  Constitution  of  the  Church,  unalterably, 
^'  unless  two-thirds  of  the  Presbyteries  under  the  care 
of  the  General  Assembly  shall  propose  alterations,  or 
amendments,  and  such  alterations  or  amendments  shall 
be  agreed  to,  and  enacted  by  the  General  Assembly.^f 

Subject  to  these  restrictions,  the  powers  formerly  held 
by  the  Synod  passed  to  the  Assembly,  under  the  two 
general  heads  of  stated  duties  to  be  performed ;  and 
occasional  prerogatives  to  be  exercised.  These  regula- 
tions stood  in  the  Constitution,  as  thus  originally  revised 
and  published,  in  the  following  form  : — 

^^  Sect.  TV.  The  Assembly  shall  receive  and  issue  all 
appeals   and   references,   which    may   be 
regularly  brought  before  them  from  the     "  ■^'^"'"'  '-^  ^^'" 

.....  .  Assembly. 

inferior  judicatories;    they  shall   review 
the  minutes  and  proceedings  of  every  Synod,  to  apj^rove 
or  censure  them;  they  shall  give  advice  and   instruc- 
tions, in  all  other  cases  submitted  to  them ;  and  they 
shall   also   constitute   the   bond   of  union,  peace,  cor- 

*  Compendium  of  the  Laws  of  the  Church  of  Scotland,  ii.  205. 
f  Eecords,  p.  5-lG. 


128  HISTOBY   OF   THE    NEW   SCHOOL. 

respondence,  and  mutual  confidence,  among  all  the 
churches. 

"Sect.  V.  To  the  General  Assembly  also  belongs 

the  power  of  consulting,  reasoning,  and 

i6r    powers    '^y^^crmcr    in  all  controvcrsics  res])ectin2: 
of  the  Assembly.      J      &  ^   &?  ...  . 

doctrine   and    discipline;    of    reproving, 

warning,  and  bearing  testimony  against,  error  in  doc- 
trine, or  immorality  in  practice,  in  any  Church,  Presby- 
tery or  Synod;  of  corresponding  with  foreign  Churches; 
of  putting  a  stop  to  schismatical  contentions  and 
disputations ;  and,  in  general,  of  recommending  and 
attempting  reformation  of  manners ;  and  of  promoting 
charity,  truth,  and  holiness,  through  all  the  churches ; 
and  of  erecting  new  Synods,  when  they  judge  it  ne- 
cessary. 

"  Sect.  VI.  Before  any  overtures  or  regulations,  pro- 
Restriction  of  P^s^d  by  ih^  Assembly,  to  be  established 
the  powers  of  the  as  standing  rules,  shall  be  obligatory  on 
Assembly.  ^^^q   churches,   it    shall   be    necessary,  to 

transmit  them  to  all  the  Presbyteries,  and  to  receive 
the  returns  of,  at  least,  a  majority  of  the  Presbyteries, 
in  writing,  approving  thereof."* 

Such  were  the  powers  which  the  Church,  through  the 
General  Synod,  originally  conveyed  to  its  lineal  successor, 
the  General  Assembly ;  and  such  the  restrictions  imposed 

*  "  Constitution  of  the  Presbyterian  Church,"  etc.,  mdcclxxxix. 
p.  147.  A  comparison  with  tlie  present  Form  of  Government,  will 
discover  tlie  emendations,  made  in  these  articles,  in  1820.  The  titles 
to  the  chapters,  in  this  first  edition,  are  significant.  "  Chapter  viii. 
Of  the  Congregational  Assembly,  or  Judicatory  usually  styled,  the 
Church  Session."  "Chapter  ix.  Of  the  Presbyterial  Assembly." 
"  Chapter  x.  Of  the  Synodical  Assembly."  *'  Chapter  xi.  Of  the 
General  Assembly." 


THE   ASSEMBLY   AND    THE    COXFESSIOX.  129 

upon  it.  The  common  imjiresslon  that  it  was,  by  the 
Presbyteries,  that  all  these  changes  were  made,  is  erro- 
neous. The  Presbyteries  Avere  not  called  to  take  any 
part,  whatever,  in  the  transaction ;  except  that  the  Gen- 
eral Synod  sent  them,  for  perusal,  a  copy  of  the  first 
Draught  of  the  Constitution  it  was  about  to  establish, 
and  invited  them  to  submit  their  remarks  ujion  it.  But 
it  was  not  framed  by  their  instrumentality,  nor  submit- 
ted to  their  vote ;  but,  by  the  Synod,  ordained,  as  the 
fundamental  law  of  the  Church,  to  which  the  Presby- 
teries were  required  to  conform  thentselves. 

In  one  important  respect,  these  provisions  of  tliC 
Constitution  have  been  modified.  In  1798,  the  Assem- 
bly passed  an  Act,  regulating  the  mode  of  receiving 
foreign  ministers  and  licentiates  into  the  Presbyteries, 
and  enjoined  its  observance  uj^on  them.  To  this,  the 
Presbytery  of  New  York  objected  the  article  restrictive 
of  the  power  of  the  Assembly  to  establish  standing 
rules,  w^ithout  a  vote  of  the  Presbyteries.  The  Assem- 
bly denied  that  tlie  restrictive  clause,  could  have  been 
meant  for  such  rules  as  the  Presbytery  supposed ;  and 
asserted  that  it  was  desio;ned  to  indicate  the  wav  in 
which  the  constitutional  rules  contained  in  the  Form  of 
Government,  Discipline,  and  Directory,  should  be  al- 
tered. That  the  design  of  the  Scotch  Barrier  xict  was, 
merely,  to  prevent  any  alterations  in  the  fundamental 
laws  and  Constitution  of  that  Church,  is  certain  ;  and 
it  seems  probable  that  Witherspoon  and  the  fathers,  who 
transferred  it  to  our  Constitution,  intended  it  in  the  same 
sense ;  although  they  inadvertently  failed  to  harmonize 
it  with  the  fundamental  ordinance,  which  required  two- 
thirds  of  the  Presbyteries  to  consent  to  any  amendment 


130  HISTORY   OF    THE    NEW   SCHOOL. 

whatever,  whether  of  the  doctrinal  standards,  or,  con- 
stitutional rules. 

The  result  of  this  discussion  was  the  submission  to 
the  Presbyteries  of  an  amendment  of  the  controverted 
clause ;  so  that  instead  of  ^^  standing  rules,''  as  formerly, 
it  should  read  "  constitutional  rules."  The  alteration 
was  allowed  by  the  requisite  number  of  Presbyteries ; 
there  being  twenty-two,  ayes,  seven  nays,  and  two  not 
voting.*  This  amendment  was  made  in  1805.  By  it, 
the  Assembly  was  released  from  any  previous  restraint ; 
and  distinctly  recognized  as  endowed  with  power  to 
enact  any  standing  laws  and  rules,  not  in  conflict  with 
the  provisions  of  the  Constitution.  The  changes  which 
were  made  in  the  constitution  of  the  supreme  court,  and 
in  the  standards  of  the  Church,  in  1788,  brought  with 
them  no  change  in  her  doctrinal  position.  The  only 
amendments  introduced  into  the  doctrinal  formularies, 
were  those  by  which  the  ambiguity  of  the  passages  re- 
specting the  civil  magistrate  was  obviated,  by  the  sub- 
stitution of  lano;uaoi;e  in  accordance  with  the  constant 
sentiments  of  our  Church,  on  that  subject.  The  clauses, 
to  Avhich  exception  was  heretofore  allowed,  being  thus 
rectified,  exception  was  no  longer  permitted ;  but  the 
Constitution  was  erected  as  "the  standard  of  our  doc- 
trine, government,  dis(?ipline,  and  worship  ;"f  and  every 
candidate  for  the  ministry  is  required  to  declare  his  re- 
ception of  the  doctrinal  formularies  "  as  containing  the 
system  of  doctrine  taught  in  the  Holy  Scriptures."! 

Of  the  sense  in  which  these  expressions  were  used  by 

*  The  Digest,  p.  49,  inaccurately  gives  these  numbers  22,  6,  and  3. 
f  Digest,  p.  3G ;  Records,  p.  547. 
J  Form  of  Government,  xv.  12 :  2. 


THE   ASSEMBLY   AND   THE    CONFESSION".  131 

the  authors,  we  have  ah-eady  had  a  very  clear  illusti-a- 
tion,  in  tlie  statement  made  by  the  Synod's  commission- 
ers^ in  the  convention  of  1786,  to  the  Dutch  and  Asso- 
ciate Reformed  commissioners.  Occurrences,  of  a  date 
immediately  subsequent  to  the  reorganization  of  the 
Church,  shed  further  light  on  the  subject. 

Seven  years  after  the  amended  Constitution  had  been 
promulgated,  the  Rev.  Hezekiah  Balch,  of  Greenville,  . 
Tennessee,  in  a  trip  to  New  England,  imbibed  some  of 
the  doctrinal  views  of  Dr.  Hopkins  of  Newport,  who  / 
had  published  his  '^System  of  Doctrines,"  two  years 
before,  in  1793.  Upon  his  return,  Mr.  Balch  engaged 
with  all  the  zeal  of  a  new  proselyte  in  the  propagation 
of  these  opinions.  He  published  them  in  the  Knox- 
ville  Gazette,  in  the  form  of  Articles  of  Faith.  In 
propagating  his  views,  he  was  overbearing  and  violent. 
The  matter  was  brought  into  the  Presbytery  of  Abing- 
don, and  caused  much  perplexity  and  trouble ;  for  a 
time,  rending  the  body  asunder.  The  attention  of  the 
General  Asseml)ly  was  arrested  ;  and  it  addressed  a  let- 
ter to  the  ministers  and  churches  of  the  Presbytery. 
"  We  perceive  with  pain," — said  the  Assembly, — "  that 
novel  opinions, — or,  at  least,  opinions  presented  in  a 
novel  dress,  and  appearance,  have  been  openly  and  ex- 
tensively circulated  amongst  you We  take  the 

present  occasion  of  declaring  our  uniform  adherence  to 
the  doctrines  contained  in  our  Confession  of  Faith,  in 
their  present  plain  and  intelligible  form  ;  and  our  fixed 
determination  to  maintain  them  a2:ainst  all  innovations. 
We  earnestly  wish  that  nothing  subversive  of  these  doc- 
trines may  be  suffered  to  exist,  or  to  be  circulated  amongst 
the  churches ;  w^e  hope  that  even  na(w  explanations  of    • 


132  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

our  known  principles,  by  unusual  and  offensive  phrases, 
Avill  be  cautiously  guarded  against."* 

At  tlie  next  meeting  of  the  Assembly,  Balch's  case 
came  up,  by  reference,  from  the  Synod  of  the  Carolinas. 
His  creed  was  examined,  and  besides  some  minor  mat- 
ters, to  which  exception  was  taken,  he  was  found  guilty 
of  false  doctrine,  in  the  following  particulars : — 

^^  In  making  disinterested  benevolence  the  only  defi- 
nition of  holiness  or  true  religion.'^  ^'  In  representing 
personal  corruption  as  not  derived  from  Adam  ;  making 
Adam^s  sin  to  be  imputed  to  his  posterity,  in  consequence 
of  a  corrupt  nature  already  possessed,  and  derived  from 
we  know  not  what;  thus,  in  eifect  setting  aside  the  idea 
of  Adam's  being  the  federal  head  or  representative  of 
his  descendants,  and  the  whole  doctrine  of  the  covenant 
of  works."  ^'  It  is  also  manifest  that  Mr.  Balch  is 
greatlv  erroneous,  in  asserting  that  the  formal  cause  of 
a  believer's  justification,  is  the  imputation  of  the  fruits 
and  effects  of  Christ's  righteousness,  and  not  the  right- 
eousness itself;  because  righteousness,  and  that  alone,  is 
the  formal  demand  of  the  law ;  and  consequently,  the 
sinner's  violation  of  the  divine  law  can  be  pardoned, 
only  in  virtue  of  the  Redeemer's  perfect  righteousness 
being  imputed  to  him  and  reckoned  as  his." 

In  view  of  these  errors,  the  Assembly  determined  to 
require  Mr.  Balch  to  acknowledge  in  its  presence  that 
he  vras  wrong  in  the  publication  of  his  creed ;  and 
^^that,  in  the  particulars  specified  above,  he  renounce 
the  errors  pointed  out;  and  that  he  engage  to  teach 
nothing  hereafter  of  a  similar  nature."  The  Assembly 
also  directed  the  Moderator  to  admonish  him  of  the 
*  Minutes  1797,  p.  129 ;  Digest,  p.  630. 


THE   ASSEMBLY   AND   THE   COXFESSIOX.  133 

divisions,  disorders,  and  trouble  which  he  had  given 
the  Church. 

From  this  decision  Mr.  Langdon,  the  delegate  from 
Connecticut,  and  one  member  of  the  Assembly,  dis- 
sented. Mr.  Balcli  read  an  open  acknowledgment  and 
retraction,  was  solemnly  admonished,  and  was  then 
declared  to  be  in  good  standing.  Upon  his  return 
home,  however,  he  was  I'eported  as  saying  that  "  he 
was  fifty  thousand  times  stronger  in  belief  of  that  defi- 
nition of  holiness  than  he  was  before.'^  This  he  ad- 
mitted, before  the  Synod  of  the  Carolinas ;  only,  instead 
of  fifty  thousand,  he  would  say  five  hundred  thousand. 
The  Synod,  thereupon,  suspended  him  from  the  minis- 
try. He  was  afterward  restored.  The  region  of  East 
Tennessee  ultimately  became  infected  to  a  considerable 
extent,  with  the  leaven  thus  introduced. 

The  New  Light  and  Cumberland  Schisms,  in  Ken- 
tucky, gave  new  occasion  for  the  fidelity  of  the  Church, 
in  protecting  the  purity  of  her  doctrines  and  order.  In 
the  former  of  these  cases,  the  trouble  arose  from  the 
dissemination  of  Hopkinsian  errors,  in  the  midst  of 
a  protracted  religious  excitement;  and  in  the  latter, 
from  Arminian  views,  originated  in  similar  circum- 
stances. The  Cumberland  Presbytery,  received  the  if 
Confession  of  Faith ;  except  that  they  denied  the  doc- 
trine of  fatality  which  they  held  it  to  contain,  and  sup-  \ 
posed  a  sufficiency  of  grace  to  be  given  to  every  man, 
for  his  attaining  to  repentance  and  salvation. 

The  New  Light  heresy  was  an  ultimate  result  of  the    ' 
theological  discoveries  which  Dr.  Balch  had  imported 
to    East   Tennessee   from   New   England.      The   E,ev. 
Thomas  B.  Craighead^  ajiutive  of  North  Carolina,  am 
' — -1^ '' 


134  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

pastor  of  a  cliurcli  in  Middle  Tennessee,  with  less  criti- 
cal acumen  than  Dr.  Taylor,  but  with  almost  ecj^ual  fer- 
tility of  genius,  and  fullness  of  development,  antici- 
pated, by  a  quarter  of  a  century,  some  of  the  main 
features  of  the  theology  of  New  Haven.  "  God  never 
was  the  author  of  sin,  by  will  or  by  contrivance.  He 
used  every  means  consistent  with  the  freedom  of  the 
human  will,  and  his  [man's]  moral  agency,  to  prevent 
the  entrance  of  sin  into  the  world.  Pie  never  willed 
the  destruction  of  any  man,  only  on  account  of  sin. 
He  never  rejects  the  sinner,  who  does  not  reject  the 
counsel  of  God,  against  his  own  soul.  And,  to  that 
rejection,  we  are  neither  compelled  by  any  necessity  of 
nature,  by  any  dispensation  of  Divine  Providence,  nor 
secret  purpose  of  his  heart.''  The  saints  of  the  primi- 
tive Church  were  in  a  different  position  from  us ;  as 
the  inspired  canon  was  not  yet  completed,  to  which  the 
immediate  presence  and  agency  of  the  Spirit  were  neces- 
sary. But  'Svhile  this  Spirit  dwelt  in  the  hearts  of 
hii  people,  it  seems  to  have  been  his  whole  office  to 
supply  the  want  of  records.  He  never  infringed  the 
liberty  of  the  human  will.  He  never  infused  such  dis- 
positions, made  such  impressions,  shed  such  light  on  the 
mind,  or  otherwise  laid  such  constraints  or  restraints  on 
their  natures,  as  to  render  their  actions  necessary,  or  to 
force  them  to  keep  God's  law."  ^^  It  is  contended  by  many, 
that  it  is  the  immediate  power  of  the  Spirit  that  renders 
the  Word  effectual,  to  produce  either  faith  or  holiness.  .  . . 
Can  anything  dwell  in  our  minds  but  thoughts  or 
ideas  ?  .  .  .  Your  pretensions  to  immediate  agency  are 
inadmissible,  on  gospel  principles.  ...  Do  you  pre- 
tend that  you  are  enlightened,  to  understand  the  Scrip- 


THE   ASSEMBLY   AND    THE   CONFESSION.  135 

turcs,  by  the  Spirit?  How  comes  it,  then,  that  good 
men  differ  in  theiiL  interpretation  of  the  same  passage  ?" 
^^  The  power  of  believing,  in  every  intelligent  creature, 
consists  in  the  strength  of  the  testimony.  Believing  is 
never  either  an  independent  or  voluntary  act.*  No 
man  can  believe  without  testimony.  No  man  can  resist 
the  force  of  credible  testimonv,  if  he  suffers  it  to  enter 
into  the  view  of  his  understanding.  ISTeither  disposi- 
tion, nor  will,  nor  motives,  have  the  least  effect.  Be- 
lieving is  an  intellectual,  not  fi  moral  act.  Disposi- 
tions, or  moral  principles  may  affect  suffering  the  testi- 
mony to  enter  into  the  view  of  the  undei'standing ;  but 
when  it  enters,  the  desire  of  life,  temporal  or  eternal, 
nor  the  fear  of  death,  can  affect  it.  In  the  licentious- 
ness of  your  freedom,  you  may  refuse  to  hear  or  obey 
God,  and  destroy  your  own  soul;  but  if  you  admit  his 
word  to  enter  into  the  view  of  your  understanding,  as 
his  word,  it  is  the  highest,  most  coercive  and  irresistible 
cause  in  the  universe.  .  .  .  Faith  acquaints  us  with 
the  divine  attractives,  without  which  we  cannot  come 
to  him.  But  when  we  are  acquainted  with  these,  we 
can  never  rest  without  devoting  ourselves  to  him  and 
his  service.'^t 

These  doctrines  of  Craxgh^e^jdj^j^ljich  were  published 
to  the  worlctliri^CrO,  liad  been  instilled,  by  their  author, 
into  the  mind  of  Barton  W.  Stone,  in  1799  or  1800; 
by  whom  they  were  imparted  to  McNemar  and  Dun- 

-^  "Voluntary,"  here,  is  manifestly  used  in  the  sense  of  self-deter- 
mined. 

f  '"'A  Sermon  on  Regeneration,  with  an  Apology  and  an  Address 
to  the  Synod  of  Kentucky,  together  with  an  Appendix,  by  T,  B. 
Craighead,  A.  B.,  V.  D.  M.,  Lexington,  Ky.,  1809,  pp.28,  4,  11,  26. 


136  HISTORY   OF    THE  XEW  SCHOOL. 

lavy.     Matthew  Houston  was  also  a  disciple  of  Craig- 
head.*    In  1803,  the  Synod  of  Kentucky,  found,  on 
review  of  the  records  of  the  Wasliington  Presbytery, 
that  tAvo  of  its  members,  Messrs.  McNemar  and  Thomp- 
son, had  been,  in  a   memorial,  charged   with   holding 
dangerous  errors,  and  tliat  the  Presbytery  had  passed 
slightly  over  the  matter.     The  Synod  censured  the  neg- 
ligence of  the  Presbytery,  and  determined  to  examine 
the  accused.     At  this  juncture,  Messrs.  Marshall,  Stone, 
McKemar,  Tliompson,  and  Dunlavy,  denied  the  juris- 
diction of  the  Synod  and  withdrew.      They  immedi- 
ately organized  themselves   into   a   Presbytery,  which 
w^as  afterward  joined  by  Houston.     They  were  all  de- 
posed from  the  ministry. 

Of  these  men  Marshall  and  Thompson  ultimately 
returned  to  the  Church ;  Houston,  McNemar,  and  Pun- 
lavy,  before  the  end  of  the  year,  joined  the  Shakers ; 
Stone  repudiated  the  divinity  of  Christ,  and  ultimately 
joined  the  sect  of  the  Campbellites. 

The  course  of  the  Synod,  with  respect  to  the  Cum- 
berland Presbytery,  was  similar  to  that  in  the  New 
Light  case.  Proposing  to  examine  the  erroneous  mem- 
bers, they  withdrew,  and  were  at  once  suspended  from 
the  ministry.  From  them,  has  sprung  the  large  and 
respectable  denomiration  of  the  Cumberland  Presby- 
terians. 

In  both  of  these  cases,  the  action  of  the  Svnod  of 
Kentucky  was,  after  mature  inquiry  and  deliberation, 
fully  approved,  and  commended  by  the  Assembly. 

In  1810,  the  case  of  the  Rev.  Wm.  C.  Davis  came 
before  the  Assembly.     For  some  years,  there  had  been 

*  Davidson's  Kentucky,  p.  271. 


THE   ASSEMBLY   AND   THE   CONFESSION.  137 

uneasiness  felt,  among  the  churches  of  South  Carolina, 
on  account  of  the  doctrines  preached  by  Mr.  Davis. 
In  1809,  he  published  a  treatise  on  systematic  theology, 
entitled,  "  The  Gospel  Plan,"  the  examination  of  which 
the  Synod  of  the  Carol inas  referred  to  the  Assembly. 
That  body  appointed  a  committee  to  examine  the  book. 
The  report  specified  the  following  errors,  which  the  As- 
sembly declared  to  be  contrary  to  the  Confession  of 
Faith  : — "  The  active  obedience  of  Christ  constitutes  no 
part  of  that  righteousness  by  which  a  sinner  is  justi- 
fied." "  Obedience  to  the  moral  law  was  not  required, 
as  the  condition  of  the  covenant  of  works."  "  God 
could  not  make  Adam,  or  any  other  creature,  either 
holy  or  unholy."  "  Regeneration  must  be  a  consequence 
of  Faith.  Faith  precedes  regeneration."  "  Faith,  in 
the  first  act  of  it,  is  not  a  holy  act."  "  If  God  has  to' 
plant  all  the  principal  parts  of  salvation  in  the  sinner's 
heart,  to  enable  him  to  believe,  the  gospel  plan  is  quite 
out  of  his  reach,  and  consequently,  does  not  suit  his 
case ;  and  it  must  be  impossible  for  God  to  condemn  a  | 
man  for  unbelief;  for  no  just  law  condemns  or  crimi-  j 
nates  any  person,  for  not  doing  what  they  cannot  do." 

Some  other  expressions  and  sentiments  the  Assembly 
pronounced  to  be  unguarded  and  dangerous.  On  the 
whole,  it  judged  that  the  preaching  or  publishing  of 
the  sentiments  here  specified  "  ought  to  subject  the  per- 
son or  persons  so  doing,  to  be  dealt  with,  by  their 
respective  Presbyteries,  according  to  the  Discipline  of 
the  Church,  relating  to  the  propagation  of  errors."* 

Under  this  decision,  Mr.  Davis  was  cited  to  trial,  by 
the  Presbytery  of  Concord.     Failing  to  appear,  after 

*  Minutes,  p.  448,  452 ;  Digest,  p.  645. 
12  * 


w 


138  HISTORY   OF   THE  NEW  SCHOOL. 

repeated  citations,  he  was  suspended  from  the  ministry, 
for  contumacy ;  and  finally  deposed. 

During  the  pendency  of  the  Cumberland  difficulties, 
in  Kentucky,  a  Commission  of  the  Synod  was  appointed 
to  visit  the  Cumberland  Presbytery,  respecting  those 
matters.  It  was  also  instructed  to  investigate  the  truth 
of  reports  which  prevailed  as  to  the  propagation  of 
erroneous  doctrines,  by  Mr.  Craighead.  The  Commis- 
sion, accordingly,  communicated  with  him,  and  received 
such  statements  as  were,  on  some  points,  ambiguous, 
but  upon  the  whole,  satisfactory.  At  the  next  meeting 
of  the  Synod,  Mr.  Craighead  preached  a  sermon,  which 
produced  much  dissatisfaction,  on  account  of  the  errone- 
ous views  therein  set  forth,  and  the  inconsistency  between 
them  and  his  answers  to  the  Commission.  The  Synod, 
thereupon,  passed  a  resolution,  "  That  the  Rev.  Thomas 
B.  Craighead  be  entreated,  to  be  cautious,  in  future,  as 
to  the  matter  of  his  sermons ;  and  careful  not  to  offend 
against  the  doctrines  of  the  Confession  of  Faith,  and 
the  feelings  of  his  Christian  brethren ;  and  that  the 
Moderator  be  directed  to  read  this  minute  to  Mr. 
Craighead." 

Three  years  afterAvard,  Mr.  Craighead  set  at  naught 
this  admonition,  by  publishing  the  sermon,  much  en- 
larged, with  additional  offensive  matter.  Some  of  its 
leading  features  have  been  already  given.  The  Pres- 
bytery of  Transylvania  took  up  the  subject,  and,  after 
an  investigation,  referred  it  to  the  Synod,  by  which  Mr. 
Craighead  was  suspended  from  the  ministry.  The 
charges,  under  which  this  sentence  was  pronounced 
were  tAvo :  ^^  Denying  and  vilifying  the  real  agency  of 
the  Spirit  in  regeneration,  and  in  the  production  of 


THE   ASSEMBLY    AND   THE   CONFESSION.  139 

faith  and  sanctification,  in  general ;"  and  "  denying^ 
vilifying,  and  misrepresenting,  the  doctrine  of  divine 
foreordination,  and  sovereignty,  and  election." 

Mr.  Craighead  gave  notice  of  appeal  to  the  next 
Assembly,  which  met  in  1811.  Bnt,  failing  to  appear, 
to  prosecute  his  appeal,  the  Assembly  pronounced  the 
decision  of  the  Synod  to  be  final.  In  1822,  a  memorial 
from  him  induced  the  Assembly  to  reopen  the  case; 
which  was,  finally,  taken  up  for  hearing,  in  1824.  The 
lapse  of  time  however,  the  age  and  infirmities  of  the 
appellant,  the  irregularity  which  had  cut  him  off  from 
an  earlier  hearing,  and  other  causes,  induced  a  disposi- 
tion to  leniency  in  the  case.  The  Assembly  decided 
^^  that  the  charges  were  not  so  clearly  proved,  but  that  he 
might  possibly  have  meant  only  to  deny  the  immediate 
agency  of  the  Spirit,  whilst  admitting  his  mediate  ope- 
ration by  and  Avith  the  AYord ;  such  being  the  sense 
which  he  seems  now  to  have  given  to  the  language. 
But  upon  the  most  fiivorable  construction,  the  doctrines 
of  the  sermon  were  pronounced  different  from  those  of 
the  Reformed  churches  and  our  Church,  and  erroneous, 
although  the  error  is  not  of  fundamental  importance." 
The  spirit  of  the  discourse  and  of  the  publication  of  it 
was  also  condemned ;  and  the  Assembly  declared  that 
^'  lSh\  Craighead  ought  so  to  retract  or  explain  his  sen- 
timents, as  to  aiford  reasonable  satisfaction  to  his 
brethren." 

The  whole  case  was,  therefore,  referred  to  the  Presby- 
tery of  West  Tennessee,  where  Mr.  Craighead  then 
lived,  with  authority,  upon  his  giving  satisfactory  re- 
tractions or  ex])lanations,  to  restore  him  to  the  ministry. 
This  was  accordingly  done. 


140  HISTORY  OF  THE  NEW  SCHOOL. 

The  history  of  this  case  closes  the  record  of  doctrinal 
questions,  in  our  Church,  prior  to,  and  apart  from  the 
New  School  controversy. 

Of  this  whole  history,  two  remarks  present  themselves. 
In  no  one  instance,  is  there  any  intimation  of  appeal 
being  made  to  the  distinctions  of  the  Preliminary  Act 
of  1729  ;  or,  to  any  such  supposed  policy  of  our  Church, 
to  justify  departure,  on  any  point,  from  the  doctrines 
of  the  Confession.  In  no  one  case,  when  such  de- 
parture was  brought  to  the  knowledge  of  the  Church, 
did  it  fail  to  elicit  the  infliction  of  judicial  censures. 


CHAPTER  IX. 

THE  NEW  ENGLAND  CHUECHES. 

independents  in  the  "Westminster  Assembly — Savoy  Confession — 
Early  New  England  standards-*-Presbyterians  in  New  England — 
Canibritig.eJ*latform: — Heads  of  Agreement^ — Saybroolc^JPIatf-orm — 
The  Connecticut  churches  claimed  to  be  Presbyterian — Early  inter- 
course of  the  General  Synod  and  the  ^Congregational  churches — 
The  American  Episcopate — Conventions  on  the  subject — Corre- 
spondence with  New  England,  after  the  Kevolution. 

Among  the  members  of  the  Westminster  Assembly, 
there  were  a  few  individuals,  who  harmonized  in  their 
doctrinal  sentiments  with  the  other  members,  but  re- 
jected the  Presbyterian  system  of  church  organization 
and  government,  and  advocated  the  principles  of  Inde- 
pendency. Some  time  after  the  dissolution  of  the  As- 
sembly, a  conference  of  Independent  ministers  and  lay 
messengers  from  their  churches  met  at  the  Savoy,  Lon- 
don, for  the  purpose  of  adopting  standards  of  faith  "and 
order  for  their  churches.  The  document  framed  and 
published  by  this  assembly  thence  received  the  name  of 
the  Savoy  Confession.  This  formulary,  was  merely  the 
Westminster  Confession,  slightly  altered,  in  some  places, 
so  as  to  express,  more  distinctly,  the  truth,  on  points 
on  which  later  errors  seemed  to  indicate  the  propriety 
of  more  specific  statements.  Those  chapters,  also,  were 
omitted  which  relate  to  church  order  and  disciplinl^ 

141 


142  HISTORY   OF   THE    NEW   SCHOOL. 

instead  of  which  one  was  inserted  in  accordance  with 
tlieir  own  system.  Of  the  doctrinal  amendments,  that 
on  justification  will  illustrate  the  character  and  ten- 
dency. Chapter  eleven,  section  one,  was  made  to  read 
as  follows : 

'"''  Those  whom  God  effectually  calleth,  he  also  freely 
justifieth,  not  by  infusing  righteousness  into  them ; 
but  by  pardoning  their  sins,  and  by  accounting  and 
accepting  their  persons  as  righteous ;  not  for  anything 
wrought  in  them,  or  done  by  them,  but  for  Christ's  sake 
alone;  nor,  by  imputing  faith  itself,  the  act  of  believ- 
ing, or  any  other  evangelical  obedience,  to  them,  as 
their  righteousness ;  but  by  imputing  Christ's  active 
obedience  unto  the  whole  law,  and  passive  obedience, 
in  his  sufferings  and  death,  for  their  whole  and  sole 
righteousness,  they  receiving  and  resting  on  him  and 
his  righteousness,  by  faith  ;  which  faith  they  have  not 
of  themselves,  it  is  the  gift  of  God." 

In  this  Savoy  article,  the  clause,  "  by  imputing 
Christ's  active  obedience  unto  the  whole  law,  and  pas- 
sive obedience  in  his  sufferings  and  death,  for  their 
whole  and  sole  righteousness," — comes  in  the  place  of 
the  following  clause  in  the  Westminster  Confession : — 
"  by  imputing  the  obedience  and  satisfaction  of  Christ 
unto  them."  This  alteration  has  evident  reference  to 
the  Neonomian  error,  of  which  we  have  already  given 
account;  and  was,  therefore,  very  offensive  to  Baxter, 
the  great  patron  of  that  error.  It  illustrates  the  extent 
of  the  difference  between  the  Westminster  and  Savoy 
Confessions. 

The  Westminster  Confession  had  been  adopted  by  a 
A^nod  of  the  New  England  churches,  at  Cambridge,  in 


THE    NE^y    EXGLAND    CHURCHES.  143 

^648^  "AYe  do  judge  it/'  said  this  Synod,  "to  be  very 
holy,  orthodox,  and  judicious,  in  all  matters  of  faith, 
and  do,  therefore,  freely  and  fully,  consent  thereunto, 
for  the  sul)_sjtance  thereof;  only,  in  those  things  which 
have  respect  to  church  government,  and  discipline,  we 
refer  ourselves  to  the  platform  of  church  discipline 
agreed  upon  by  this  present  assembly,''* — the  Cam- 
bridgi;e  Platform. 

After  the  publication  of  the  Savoy  Confession,  "  it 
was  twice  publicly  read,  examined,  and  approved  ;"  at 
a  Synod  held  in  Boston,  in  1680,  "  and  some  small  varia- 
tions  made  from  that  of  Savoy,  in  compliance  with  that 
at  Westminster;  and  so,  after  such  collations,  but  no 
contentions,   voted   and  printed,   as  the  faith  of  Xew 

Englaud/'t 

We  have  already  mentioned,  that  many  of  the  early 

colonists  of  New  Enoland  were  Presbyterians ;  amount- 
ing,  in  1680,  in  Connecticut,  to  nearly  one-half  of  the 
entire  population.  Early  efforts  were  made  by  them 
to  organize  themselves  according  to  •  their  Presbyterian 
principles.  But  the  government  was  against  them; 
and  its  j^ower  was  used,  Avithout  scruple,  to  suppress 
such  attempts ;  so  that  they  were  never  permitted  to 
develop  the  Presbyterian  system  of  order. 

Their  influence,  however,  was  powerfully  felt  in  the 
form  early  given  to  the  constitution  of  the  New  Eng- 
land churches.  Cotton's  book  '^  Of  the  Keys,"  is  stated 
by  Mather  to  have  been,  next  to  the  Bible,  the  early 
platform  of  the  New  England  churches ;  and  he  quotes 
Rutherford,  speaking  of  that  treatise  as  "  well  sound 

*  Mather's  Magnalia,  Hartford,  1820,  vol.  ii.,  p  155. 

f  Ibid.,  p.  156.  ^ 


144  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

in  our  way,  if  he  had  given  some  more  power  to  Assem- 
blies, and  in  some  lesser  points." 

In  the  Cambridge  Platform,  itself,  of  1648,  a  system 
is  described  to  which  the  same  language  may  justly  be 
applied.  ^'  Of  elders,  (who  are  also  in  Scripture  called 
bishops,)"  it  states  that  "some  attend  chiefly  to  the 
ministry  of  the  Word,  as  the  pastors  and  ^teachers ; 
others  attend  especially  unto  rule,  who  are,  therefore, 
called  ruling  elders."  '^  The  office  of  the  deacon  is  in- 
stituted in  the  Church  by  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ.  .  .  . 
The  office  and  work  of  the  deacon  is,  to  receive  the 
offerings  of  the  church,  gifts  given  to  the  church,  and 
to  keep  the  treasury  of  the  church,  and  therewith  to 
serve  the  tables,  which  the  church  is  to  provide ;  as, 
the  Lord's  table,  the  table  of  the  ministers,  and  of  such 
as  are  in  necessity ;  to  whom  the  deacons  are  to  distri- 
bute with  simplicity." 

"  Church  government  or  rule  is  placed  by  Christ  in 
the  officers  of  the  Church."  "  Synods,  orderly  assem- 
bled, and  riglitly  proceeding  according  to  the  pattern, 
Acts  XV.,  we  acknowledge  as  the  ordinance  of  Christ; 
and,  though  not  absolutely  necessary  to  the  being,  yet 
many  times,  through  the  iniquity  of  men  and  perverse- 
ness  of  the  times,  necessary  to  the  well-being  of  churches, 
for  the  establishment  of  truth  and  peace  therein."  "  The 
Svnods'  directions,  so  far  as  consonant  to  the  Word  of 
God,  are  to  be  received  with  reverence  and  submission ; 
not  only  for  their  agreement  therewith,  (which  is  the 
principal  ground  thereof,  and  without  which  they  bind 
not  at  all,)  but  also,  secondarily,  for  the  power,  wliereby 
they  are  made,  as  being  an  ordinance  of  God,  appointed 
^ereunto  in  his  Word." 


THE  NEW  ENGLAND  CHURCHES.       145 

Mather,  in  his  Magnalia,  written  about  the  close  of 
the  seventeenth  century,  states  the  following,  among 
other  points,  determined  "by  a  late  assembly  of  our 
ministers  at  Cambridge/' 

"Synods  duly  composed  of  messengers,  chosen  by 
them  whom  they  are  to  represent,  and  proceeding  with 
due  regard  unto  the  will  of  God  in  his  Word,  are  to  be 
reverenced,  as  determining  the  mind  of  the  Holy  Spirit, 
concerning  things  necessary  to  be  received  and  practiced, 
in  order  to  the  edification  of  the  churches  therein 
represented." 

"  The  power  of  church  government  belongs  only  to 
the  elders  of  the  church." 

"  There  are  yet  certain  cases  wherein  the  elders,  in 
the  management  of  their  church  government,  are  to 
take  the  concurrence  of  the  fraternity."* 

The  Heads  of  Agreement  of  1690,  do  not  seem  ever 
to  have  been  formally  adopted  by  the  New  England 
churches  at  large.  They  have  been  recognized,  how- 
ever, from  their  first  publication,  as  true  exhibitions  of 
Congregational  principles.  The  Sa^rook  Elatform 
was  formed,  in  1708,  by  a  Synod  of  the  Connecticut 
ministers ;  who,  at  the  same  time,  owned  and  consented 
to  the  Savoy  Confession  and  the  Heads  of  Agreement. 
These  three  documents,  thenceforth,  became  the  stand- 
ards of  the  Connecticut  churches. 

The  Saybrook  Platform  provided  that  the  elders  of  a 
particular  church,  with  the  consent  of  the  brethren, 
have  power  and  ought  to  exercise  discipline,  in  all  cases 
within  that  church.      The  churches,   in  each   county, 

*  Mather,  vol.  ii.  p.  213. 
13 


146  HISTORY   OF   THE  isEW  SCHOOL. 

form  a  Consociation.  The  council  of  this  body  consists 
of  all  the  teaching  and  ruling  elders  of  the  churches ; 
^hich  are,  also,  at  liberty  to  delegate  lay  messengers, 
who  are  entitled  to  deliberate  and  vote,  as  members ; 
provided,  however,  that  no  matter  shall  be  determined 
without  a  majority  of  the  elders.  This  court  is  em- 
powered to  try  and  decide  all  questions  of  scandal 
coming  up  from  any  of  the  churches. 

The  Platform  also  appointed  that  all  the  teaching 
elders  in  each  several  county,  shall  form  a  county  Asso- 
ciation, with  power  to  consult  resj^ecting  the  duties  of 
their  office,  to  resolve  questions  submitted  to  them ;  to 
examine  and  recommend  candidates  for  the  ministry ; 
to  enter  proceedings,  before  the  appropriate  council, 
against  any  of  their  number,  for  scandal  or  heresy;  and 
to  look  after  vacant  churches,  and  take  measures  to 
have  them  supplied.  The  Platform  also  provided  for 
a  General  Association,  composed  of  one  or  two  delegates 
from  each  county  Association  in  the  State,  to  meet  once 
a  year.  In  the  Associations,  lay  delegates  were  not 
admitted. 

In  4799.,  Jhe  Old  Hartford  North  Association,  in 
reply  to  certain  inquiries,  made  the  following  statement, 
as  to  the  constitution  of  the  Connecticut  churches. 

"  This  Association  gives  information  to  all  whom  it 
may  concern,  that  the  constitution  of  the  churches  in 
the  State  of  Connecticut,  founded  on  the  common  usages, 
and  the  Confession  of  Faith,  Heads  of  Agreement,  and 
Articles  of  Church  Discipline,  adopted  at  the  earliest 
period  of  the  settlement  of  the  State,  is  not  Congre- 
gational, but  contains  the  essentials  of  the  govern- 
ment   of   the    Church   of   Scotland,   or    Presbyterian 


THE   NETT   ENGLAND    CHURCHES.  147 

Churcli  in  America,  particularly,  as  it  gives  a  decisive 
power  to  ecclesiastical  councils ;  and  a  Consociation, 
consisting  of  ministers  and  messengers,  or  a  lay  repre- 
sentation from  the  churches,  is  possessed  of  substantially 
the  same  authority  as  a  Presbytery.  The  judgments, 
decisions,  and  censures  in  our  churches  and  in  the  Pres- 
byterian are  mutually  deemed  valid.  The  churches, 
therefore,  in  Connecticut,  at  large,  and  in  our  district,  in 
particular,  are  not  now,  and  never  were,  from  the  earliest 
period  of  our  settlement.  Congregational  churches,  ac- 
cording to  the  ideas  and  forms  of  church  order  contained 
in  the  Book  of  Discipline,  called  the  Cambridge  Platform. 
There  are,  however,  scattered  over  the  State,  perhaps 
ten  or  twelve  churches  (unconsociated)  who  are  properly 
called  Congregational,  agreeably  to  the  iTilcs  of  Church 
Discipline  in  the  book  above  mentioned.  Sometimes, 
indeed,  the  Associated  churches  of  Connecticut  are 
loosely  and  vaguely,  though  improperly,  termed  Congre- 
gational. While  our  churches,  in  the  State  at  large, 
are,  in  the  most  essential  and  important  respects,  the 
same  as  the  Presbyterian,*  still,  in  minute  and  unim- 
portant points  of  church  order  and  discipline,  both  we 
and  the  Presbyterian  Church  in  America  acknowledge 

a  diiference."t 

In  these  facts,  we  have  the  kev  to  the  circumstance 
that  many  of  the  churches  of  New  England,  are,  to  this 
day,  known  by  the  name  of  "  Presbyterian.'^  And,  of 
the  many  ministers  who,  formerly,  from  New  England, 
entered  our  church,  Edwards  was  not  the  only  one  who 
could  have  written,  as  did  he, — "  I  have  long  been  per- 

*  Quere — [Church  of  Scotland.] 

f  Van  Ransselaer's  Presbyterian  Magazine,  1856,  p.  172. 


148  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

fectly  out  of  conceit  of  our  unsettled,  confused  way  of 
church  government  in  this  land ;  and  the  Presbyterian 
way  has  ever  appeared  to  me  most  agreeable  to  the 

(Word  of  God,  and  the  reason  and  nature  of  things."* 

The  identity  of  the  theology  of  the  two  denomina- 
tions, and  the  comparative   agreement  on  the  subject 
of    order    and    government,    early    induced    intimate 
I  iand  confidential   relations  between   the  New   England 

f  churches,  and  those  of  the  General  Synod.  In  Connec- 
ticut, so  strong  were  the  tendencies  toward  a  thorough 
adoption  of  Presbyterianism,  as  to  encourage  the  hope 
of  actual  union.  In  1723,  occasion  of  correspondence 
with  the  Connecticut  ministers  having  arisen  out  of 
difficulties  in  the  church  in  New  York,  the  Synod 
appointed  a  committee  to  confer  with  them  on  that 
subject ;  "  and  if  the  good  ends  proposed,  relating  to 
New  York,  be  at  the  conference  happily  accomplished, 
the  Synod  recommends  it  to  those  of  their  members 
afore  appointed  to  said  conference,  to  treat  with  said 
ministers  of  Connecticut  about  a  union  with  us ;  and 
empower  them  to  concert  and  conclude  upon  any 
methods  that  may  conduce  to  that  end."f  The  condi- 
tion precedent  failed,  and  the  overture  for  union  does 
not  seem  to  have  been  communicated.  The  middle  of 
the  eighteenth  century  witnessed  a  time  of  much  con- 
troversy and  trouble  in  Connecticut,  arising  out  of 
the  Presbyterian  tendencies  which  prevailed,  and  the 
anxious  exertions  Avliich  were  employed  to  prevent  their 
acquiring  general  control. 

The  first  stated  intercourse  between  the  Synod  and 
the  New  England  churches,  arose  out  of  the  question 
*  Dwight's  Life  of  Edwards,  p.  412.  f  Kecords,  p.  76. 


THE  NEW  ENGLAND  CHURCHES.       149 

of  the  American  Episcopate,  and  the  parties  to  it  were, 
the  General  Synod  and  the  General  Association  of 
Connecticut. 

Among  the  measures  devised,  by  the  patrons  of) 
British  supremacy  in  the  colonies,  with  a  view  to  secure 
uniformity  in  religion,  the  general  establishment  of  th^ 
Church  of  England,  and  the  entire  subordination  of 
the  colonies  to  the  British  Government,  one  of  the  most 
cherished  was  that  of  establishing,  by  act  of  Parlia- 
ment, an  American  Episcopate. 

It  was  imposible  that  the  people  of  New  England 
and  the  Presbyterian  Church  should  regard  such  a  pro- 
ject with  indifference.  They  had  fled  to  this  country, 
exj^ressly,  to  find  refuge  from  the  oppressions  and  per- 
secutions which  they  had  suffered  in  Great  Britain,  for 
refusal  to  conform  to  that  Church.  They  had  realized, 
in  the  land  of  their  exile,  enough  of  the  same  policy 
from  that  Church,  to  satisfy  them,  that  only  the  power 
was  wanting  to  enact  the  English  St.  Bartholomew,  and 
the  oppressions  by  which  the  Presbyterians  of  Ireland 
and  Scotland  had  been  trodden  and  peeled.  The  ob- 
jection was  not  to  the  enjoyment,  by  those  who  pre- 
ferred them,  of  the  rites  of  religion  according  to  the 
order  of  the  Episcopal  Church.  But  it  was,  to  the 
power  of  Parliament  to  assume  jurisdiction  over  the"? 
ecclesiastical  affairs  of  the  colonies.  That  this  was  the 
point  where  the  whole  question  hinged,  is  not  only 
apparent,  on  the  entire  face  of  the  discussions  on  the 
subject,  but  is  demonstrated  by  two  facts ;  first,  that  the 
great  body  of  Episcopalians,  themselves,  were  as  active 
in  opposition  to  the  scheme  as  any  others  i  and  second, 
that  as  soon  as  the  Pevolution  had  obviated  any  appre- 

13* 


150  HISTORY   OF   THE   KEW   SCHOOL. 

hensiong  from  Parliament,  all  oppositioD  was  withdrawn, 
and  the  consecration  of  the  first  American  bishops  was 
hailed,  with  general  congratulations,  by  the  other  de- 
nominations in  America. 

Of  the  controversy  on  this  subject,  John  Adams, 
writing  to  Dr.  Morse,  Dec.  2,  1815,  says, — that  ^'the 
apprehension  of  Episcopacy  contributed,  fifty  years  ago,  as 
much  as  any  other  cause,  to  arouse  the  attention,  not  only 
of  the  inquiring  minds,  but  of  the  common  peo])le,  and 
urge  them  to  close  thinking  on  the  constitutional 
authority  of  Parliament  over  the  colonies." 

"  The  objection  was  not  merely  to  the  office  of  bishop, 
though  even  that  was  dreaded ;  as,  to  the  authority  of 
Parliament,  on  which  it  must  be  founded.  The  reason- 
ing was  this  : — The  archbishops  and  bishops,  in  Eng- 
land, can  neither  locate  and  limit  dioceses  in  America, 
nor  ordain  bishops,  in  any  part  of  the  dominions  of 
Great  Britain,  out  of  the  realm,  by  any  law  of  the 
kingdom,  or  any  law  of  the  colonies,  nor  by  any  canon 
law  acknowleded  by  either.  The  king  cannot  grant  his 
conge  (felire^  to  any  people  out  of  the  realm.  There  is 
no  power,  or  pretended  power,  less  than  Parliament,  that 
can  create  bishops  in  America.  But,  if  Parliament  can 
erect  dioceses,  and  appoint  bishops,  they  may  introduce 
the  whole  hierarchy,  establish  tithes,  forbid  marriages 
and  funerals,  establish  religion,  forbid  dissent,  make 
schism  heresy,  impose  penalties  extending  to  life  and 
limb,  as  well  as  to  liberty  and  property." 

Such  considerations  excited  universal  apprehension, 
when  it  was  known  that  Archbishop  Seeker  had  been 
zealously  laboring   to   secure   the   obnoxious  measure. 

*  Permission  to  elect. 


THE   NEW   ENGLAND   CHURCHES.  151 

In  Virginia,  a  convention  of  the  clergy  was  called,  to 
consider  the  propriety  of  petitioning  for  a  bishop.  But 
twelve  out  of  one  hundred  attended;  and,  of  these, 
four  protested  against  the  petition ;  whereupon  the 
house  of  burgesses  tendered  the  protesters  their  unani- 
mous thanks,  "  for  the  wise  and  well-timed  opposition 
they  had  made  to  the  pernicious  project  of  a  few 
mistaken  clergymen,  for  introducing  an  American 
bishop/^* 

It  was  with  a  view  to  the  exertions,  at  this  time, 
making  on  this  subject,  that  the  General  Synod,  in  1766, 
addressed  a  letter  to  the  brethren  in  Cbnnecticut,  pro- 
posing a  convention  of  delegates  from  the  two  churches. 
The  Synod,  at  the  same  time,  appointed  eight  commis- 
sioners to  act  on  its  behalf,  in  such  convention. 

Mr.  Rodgers,  one  of  these  commissioners  was  pastor 
of  the  church  in  New  York,  which  at  this  very  time, 
was  making  a  renewed  but  unavailing  effort  to  secure  a 
charter.  The  opposition  of  the  Episcopal  clergy  had 
prevented  its  obtaining  this  privilege ;  which  had  been 
pursued  by  repeated  applications,  beginning  as  early  as 
1719.  The  last'  petition  was  now  pending,  before  the 
Lords  Commissioners  of  Trade  and  Plantations,  in 
London.  Before  them  the  Bishop  of  London  appeared, 
personally,  in  opposition,  and  defeated  the  petition, 
which,  after  long  delay,  was  rejected,  in  August,  1767.t 
Such  facts  stimulated  the  zeal  of  the  colonists  against 
the  increase  of  Episcopal  power.  It  was  not  until  after 
the  Revolution  that  a  charter  was  obtained  by  that 
Church. 

*  Hawk's  Contributions,  vol.  i.  p.  127-130. 
f  Webster,  p.  579. 


152  HISTORY  OF  THE  NEW  SCHOOL. 

TJie  proposal  for  a  convention  was  accepted  by  the 
General  Association  of  Connecticut.  At  the  first  meet- 
ing, a  plan  of  intercourse  between  the  two  churches, 
was  agreed  upon,  which  was  adopted  by  both.  It  pro- 
vided for  an  annual  convention  of  delegates  from  the 
two  bodies ;  which  should,  however,  have  no  power 
over  pastors,  churches,  or  any  of  the  internal  affairs  of 
the  churches.  They  were  to  remain  entire  and  inde- 
pendent of  each  other.  The  objects  prescribed  to  the 
convention  were,  "  to  gain  information  of  the  public  state 
of  this  united  cause  and  interest ;  to  collect  accounts 
relating  thereto ;  to  unite  our  endeavors  for  spreading 
the  gospel  and  preserving  the  religious  liberties  of  our 
churches;  to  diffuse  harmony  and  keep  up  a  corre- 
spondence thoughout  the  united  body,  and  with  our 
friends  abroad ;  to  recommend,. cultivate  and  preserve, 
loyalty  and  allegiance  to  the  king's  majesty;  and,  also,  to 
address  the  king  or  the  king's  ministers,  from  time  to 
time,  with  assurances  of  the  unshaken  loyalty  of  the  pas- 
tors comprehended  in  this  union,  and  the  churches  under 
their  care  ;  and  to  vindicate  them,  if  unjustly  aspersed.''* 

Aspersions  of  their  loyalty  were,  at  that  time,  rife ; 
and  were  employed  in  resisting  such  applications  as  that 
of  the  New  York  church. 

The  plan  provided  for  inviting  the  other  New  Eng- 
land churches,  and  the  Reformed  Dutch  brethren  to  join 
the  convention.  They  do  not,  however,  seem  to  have 
acceded  to  it.  The  convention,  at  once,  opened  corre- 
spondence with  influential  parties  in  Britain,  and  main- 
tained a  vigilant  watchfulness  over  the  interests  of  the 

*  This  Plan  of  Union,  in  Green's  Christian  ^Advocate,   vol.   xi. 
p.  496. 


THE  NEW  EXGEAND  CHURCHES.        153 

churches,  as  involved  in  the  policy  of  the  British  gov- 
ernment, the  Society  for  propagating  the  gospel  in 
foreign  parts,  and  the  advocates  of  the  American  Epis- 
copate. The  last  meeting  was  held  in  1776,  when  the 
independence  of  the  United  States  precluded  the  appre- 
hensions out  of  which  they  had  originated,  and  they 
ceased  to  meet. 

After  the  Revolution,  stated  intercourse  with  Xew 
England  was  not  resumed  until  1791.  In  that  year, 
the  General  Assembly  made  overtures,  for  correspon- 
dence, to  the  Congregational  churches.  They  were  im- 
mediately accepted,  by  the  General  Association  of  Con- 
necticut; and,  ultimately,  by  all  the  New  England 
churches.  The  plan,  first  adopted  with  the  Connecticut 
Association,  provided  that  the  two  parties  should,  each, 
annually  appoint  three  delegates  to  attend  the  sessions 
of  the  other,  with  a  right  to  deliberate  on  all  questions 
coming  before  the  body,  but  not  to  vote.  In  1794,  the 
Assembly  proposed,  and  the  Association  agreed,  that 
the  delegates  be  allowed  to  vote ;  and  the  plan,  thus 
amended,  was  adopted  in  the  subsequent  treaties  with 
the  other  New  England  churches. 


y 


CHAPTER    X. 

THE   PLAN   OF    UXIOX. 

Origin  of  tlie  Plan— ^Its  provisions — It  was  less  in  harmony  with 
Presbyterianism  than  the  Saybrook  Platform — Its  unconstitution- 
ality— Its  imprudence — The  Plan  of  1808 — Admission  of  the  Mid- 
dle Association — Its  subdivision — Erection  of  the  Svnod  of  Geneva 
• — Synod  of  Genesee — Presbytery  of  Chenango — Synod  of  Utica — 
Practical  working  of  the  Plan  of  Union — Synod  of  the  Western 
Reserve — Presbvterianism  enervated  bv  the  Plan — Prevalence  of 
Hopkinsianisra  in  New  England — Consequent  reaction  toward  In- 
dependency. 

In  1801,  the  Assembly  adopted  what  is  popularly 
known  as  the  Plan  of  Union,  with  the  Association  of 
Connecticut. 

The  Presbyterian  tendencies  of  the  ministers  of  Con- 
necticut were  the  originating  cause  of  this  plan.  Emi- 
grants from  New  England,  and  from  the  Presbyterian 
Church,  were  filling  up  the  wilderness  of  western  New 
York  and  Ohio.  They  were  brought  into  intimate 
contact,  in  circumstances  which  indicated  the  propriety 
and  duty  of  their  endeavoring  to  unite  in  Christian 
fellowship,  and  in  maintaining  the  ordinances  of  relig- 
ion. To  facilitate  this  object,  the  proposition  for  a 
system  of  co-operation  was  made,  by  the  General  Asso- 
ciation of  Connecticut,  to  the  General  Assembly.  The 
latter  referred  the  proposition  to  a  committee,  consisting 

154 


THE   PLAN   OF   UNION.  155 

of  the  Rev.  Drs.  Edwards,  McKnight,  and  Wood  hull, 
the  Kev.  Mr.  Blatchford,  and  Elder  Hiitton.  Of  this 
committee,  Mr.  Blatchford  was  the  delegate  appointed 
by  the  Association  of  Connecticut,  to  confer  on  this 
subject,  and  Dr.  Edwards  had  recently  been  received 
from  that  Association. 

The  committee  soon  reported  the  Regulations,  which 
were  approved  by  the  Assembly,  sent  to  the  Association 
and  adopted  by  it.     This  important  paper  is  entitled  to 
a  place,  in  full,  in  these  pages.     It  is  as  follows  : — 
^'  Regulations  adopted  by  the  General  Assembly  of  the 
Presbyterian  Church  in  America,  and  by  the  General 
Association  of  the  State  of  Connecticut,  with  a  view 
to  prevent  alienation,  and  to  promote  union  and  har- 
mony in  those  new  settlements  which  are  composed 
of  inhabitants  from  these  bodies. 
"  1st.  It  is  strictly  enjoined  on  all  their  missionaries 
to   the   new   settlements,   to    endeavor,   by   all    proper 
means,  to  promote  mutual  forbearance,  and  a  s^^irit  of 
accommodation,  between  those  inhabitants  of  the  new 
settlements  who  hold  the  Presbyterian,  and  those  who 
hold  the  Congregational,  form  of  Church  government. 

"  2d.  If,  in  the  new  settlements,  any  church  of  the 
Congregational  order  shall  settle  a  minister  of  the  Pres- 
byterian order,  that  church  may,  if  they  choose,  still 
conduct  their  discipline  according  to  Congregational 
principles,  settling  their  difficulties  among  themselves, 
or  by  a  council  mutually  agreed  upon  for  that  2:>nrpose. 
But,  if  any  difficulty  shall  exist,  between  the  minister 
and  the  church,  or  any  member  of  it,  it  shall  be  referred 
to  the  Presbytery  to  which  the  minister  shall  belong, 
provided  both  parties  agree  to  it ;   if  not,  to  a  council 


156  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

consisting  of  an  equal  number  of  Presbyterians  and 
Congregationalists,  agreed  upon  by  both  parties. 
^  ^^  3d.  If  a  Presbyterian  church  shall  settle  a  minister 
of  Congregational  principles,  that  church  may  still  con- 
duct their  discipline  according  to  Presbyterian  princi- 
ples, excepting  that  if  a  difficulty  arise  between  him  and 
his  church,  or  any  member  of  it,  the  cause  shall  be  tried 
by  the  Association  to  which  the  said  minister  shall 
belong,  provided  both  parties  agree  to  it ;  otherwise  by 
a  council,  one  half  Congregationalists  and  the  other 
Presbyterians,  mutually  agreed  upon  by  the  parties. 

"4th.  If  any  congregation  consist  partly  of  those 
who  hold  the  Congregational  form  of  discipline,  and 
partly  of  those  who  hold  the  Presbyterian  form,  we 
recommend  to  both  parties,  that  this  be  no  obstruction 
to  their  uniting  in  one  church  and  settling  a  minister ; 
and  that,  in  this  case,  the  church  choose  a  standing 
committee,  from  the  communicants  of  said  church, 
whose  business  it  shall  be  to  call  to  account  every  mem- 
ber of  the  church  who  shall  conduct  himself  inconsist- 
ently with  the  laws  of  Christianity,  and  to  give  judg- 
ment on  such  conduct.  That  if  the  person  condemned 
by  their  judgment  be  a  Presbyterian,  he  shall  have 
liberty  to  appeal  to  the  Presbytery ;  if  he  be  a  Congre- 
gationalist,  he  shall  have  liberty  to  appeal  to  the  body 
of  the  male  communicants  of  the  church.  In  the  former 
case,  the  determination  of  the  Presbytery  shall  be  final, 
unless  the  church  shall  consent  to  a  further  appeal  to  the 
Synod,  or  to  the  General  Assembly ;  and,  in  the  latter 
case,  if  the  party  condemned  shall  wish  for  a  trial  by  a 
mutual  council,  the  cause  shall  be  referred  to  such  a  coun- 
cil.  And  provided  the  standing  committee  of  any  church 


THE   PLAN   OF   UNION.  157 

shall  depute  one  of  themselves  to  attend  the  Presbytery, 
he  may  have  the  same  right  to  sit  and  act  in  the  Pres- 
bytery as  a  ruling  elder  of  the  Presbyterian  church."* 

We  have  already  described  the  Saybrook  Platform, 
by  which  the  order  of  the  Connecticut  churches  was 
regulated.  A  comparison  of  the  two  Avill  show  that  the 
Regulations  of  1801  did  not  even  conform  as  closely  to 
the  principles  of  Presbyterian  government  as  did  the 
Platform.  The  theory,  distinctly  stated  in  the  latter, 
was,  that  the  power  of  discipline  belongs  to  the  elders, 
whom  all  the  churches  were  expected  to  elect.  And 
although  it  provided  for  the  admission  into  the  judicial 
councils  of  the  Consociations,  of  lay  messengers,  author- 
ized to  sit  and  vote, — yet,  a  majority  of  the  elders  Avas 
necessary,  in  order  to  a  decision.  Further,  this  pre- 
sence of  lay  messengers  was  limited  to  the  county  Con- 
sociations, which  correspond  to  our  Presbyteries,  except 
that  their  business  is  mainly,  if  not  exclusively  confined 
to  cases  of  controversy  and  discipline,  arising  in  the 
churches  of  their  bounds.  On  the  other  hand,  the  As- 
sociations,— which  had  charge  of  the  more  important 
duties  of  Presbyteries  and  Synods,  such  as  consultations 
as  to  the  duties  of  the  ministry  and  the  common  inter- 
ests of  the  churches,  the  supplying  of  vacant  churches, 
and  the  examination  and  recommending  of  candidates 
for  the  ministry,  were  composed  exclusively  of  minis- 
ters ;  neither  ruling  elders  nor  lay  messengers  being 
admitted  to  their  deliberations.  The  Councils  appointed 
by  the  provisions  of  the  Platform  were,  furthermore, 
invested  with  sole  jurisdiction,  over  all  cases,  to  the  ex- 
clusion of  special  mutual  councils,  called  for  the  par- 

*  Minutes,  1801.  p.  124 ;  Digest,  p.  570. 
14 


158  HISTORY   OF   THE   ISFAV   SCHOOL. 

ticiilar  occasion,  which  were  used  in  the  strictly  Congre- 
gational churches. 

In  none  of  these  respects,  was  the  Plan  as  much  in 
accordance  with  our  principles  and  order  as  was  the 
Platform.  In  judicial  cases,  instead  of  Consociation  or 
Presbytery,  it  authorized  mutual  councils  of  mixed  ma- 
terials, Presbyterian  and  Congregational.  In  churches 
composed  of  a  mixed  membership,  it  set  aside  the  elders, 
which  both  Confession  and  Platform  demand,  and  sub- 
stituted a  standing  committee,  consisting  of  persons  who 
were  subjected  to  no  examination,  and  held  to  no  pledge, 
neither  of  adherence  to  the  doctrines  of  the  Confession, 
nor  of  devotion  to  its  system  of  order.  They  were 
neither  called,  nor  tried,  nor  ordained,  to  any  office  in 
the  church.  Yet  they  were  empowered  to  sit,  as  sole 
judges,  in  the  first  instance,  of  all  cases  arising  in  the 
church.  They  were  authorized  to  send  delegates  to 
Presbytery,  with  power,  not  only  to  sit  in  the  determin- 
ing of  judicial  cases, — the  only  power  which,  under  the 
Platform  they  could  pretend  to  claim  in  the  Consocia- 
tion,— but  also  to  deliberate  and  act  on  all  questions 
which  might  come  before  the  body.  And,  whilst  the 
Platform  expressly  excluded  all  laymen  from  the  delibe- 
rations of  the  Associations  of  their  own  Church,  respect- 
ing Its  great  interests ;  and,  even  in  judicial  cases,  gave 
their  votes  no  j^ower,  unless  sustained  by  a  majority  of 
the  elders, — the  Plan  gave  them  an  equal  voice  with 
the  most  venerable  ministers  and  elders,  over  the  great- 
est interests  of  the  Church,  to  which  their  very  attitude 
indicated  that  they  were  probably  alien,  and  possibly 
hostile. 

In  this  system,  the  disregard  of  the  plainest  require- 


THE   PLAX  OF   UXIOX.  159 

ments  of  the  Constitution,  which,  expressly  and  unequi- 
vocally, prescribed  the  organization  of  Presbyteries  and 
qualifications  of  their  members,  is  less  surprising.  For, 
the  fathers  of  our  Church,  having  so  recently  been  ac- 
customed to  see  the  General  Synod  exercise  powers,  un- 
restricted by  a  constitution,  were  not  yet  able  to  realize 
that  the  General  Assembly  was  bound  to  conform  to  the 
provisions  of  the  Constitution,  which  the  Church, 
through  the  General  Synod,  had  established,  for  her 
own  protection  and  the  ordering  of  all  her  courts,  higher 
and  lower. 

The  imprudence  of  allowing  such  a  breach  in  her 
walls,  as  that  involved  in  the  Plan  of  Union,  might 
have  been  expected  to  arrest  a  more  prompt  attention, 
and  secure  its  rejection.  But  the  Assembly  was  se- 
duced by  the  siren  of  union  and  peace.  The  Plan  was 
adopted,  and  the  way  thus  prepared  for  corrupting  tiie 
doctrines  of  the  Church,  the  utter  defacing  of  her  order,  / 
and  the  introduction  of  protracted  controversy  andj 
strife,  and  final  schism. 

The  principal  field,  contemplated  in  the  Plan  of 
Union,  was  the  western  part  of  the  State  of  New  York, 
which  was,  then,  rapidly  filling  with  a  population,  by 
whom  the  wilderness  was  subdued  and  the  institutions 
of  civilization  and  Christiauitv  established.  In  1807, 
the  Synod  of  Albany,  meeting  at  Cooperstown,  received 
delegates  from  two  Congregational  bodies,  located  in 
that  region  ; — the  Middle  Association  in  the  Western 
District,  and  the  Northern  Associated  Presbytery. 
Their  mission  was,  to  treat  of  "  union  and  correspond- 
ence" with  the  Synod.  In  response  to  their  overtures, 
the  Synod  addressed  a  letter  to  the  two  bodies,  propos- 


1 


160  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

ing  that  they  should  enter  into  organic  union  with  the 
Presbyterian  Church.  "  Nor  do  we  confine  our  invi- 
tation/^ said  the  Synod,  "  to  you,  as  ministers  ;  but  we 
also  extend  it  to  delegates  from  your  churches  ;  whom 
we  are  willing  to  receive,  as  substantially  the  same 
with  our  ruling  elders ;  to  assist  us  in  our  public  de- 
liberations and  decisions.  Knowing  the  influence  of 
education  and  habit,  should  the  churches  under  your 
care  prefer  transacting  their  internal  concerns  in  the 
present  mode  of  Congregational  government,  we  assure 
them  of  our  cheerfulness  in  leaving  them  undisturbed,  in 
the  administration  of  that  government,  unless  they  shall 
choose  to  alter  it  themselves."* 

This  proposition  was  made,  subject  to  the  approval 
of  the  General  Assembly.  The  Assembly"  granted  the 
desired  permission,  in  1808,  whereupon  the  Middle  As- 
sociation accepted  the  plan  and  was  received  by  the 
Synod,  "  retaining  their  own  name  and  usages,  in  the 
administration  of  the  government  of  their  churches, 
according  to  the  terms  stated  in  the  plan." 

The  sixth  article,  in  the  Constitution  of  the  body 
thus  received  by  the  Sjmod,  provided,  that  ^^  nothing 
should  be  construed  in  opposition  to  the  accommodating 
articles  agreed  upon  bet^veen  the  General  Assembly  of 
the   Presbyterian  Church,  and  the  General  Association 

of  Connecticut.^t 

In  1809,  the  year  after  the  reception  of  this  Associa- 
tion, it  reported  to  the  Synod,  twenty-one  churches,  all 
of  them,  it  would  seem.  Congregational.  At  the  next 
meeting  of  the  Synod,  a  joint  request  was  received  from 
the  Middle  Association  and  the  Presbytery  of  Geneva, 
*  Assembly's  Digest,  p.  574.  f  Ibid.,  p.  572. 


THE   PLAN   OF   UNION.  161 

to  be  subdivided  into  three  Presbyteries.  In  compli- 
ance with  this  request,  a  part  of  the  territory  of  the 
Geneva  Presbytery  was  detached  from  it,  and  joined  to 
the  Middle  Association,  which  was  divided  into  the 
two  Presbyteries  of  Cayuga  and  Onondaga.  These 
both,  at  once,  in  written  constitutions,  planted  them- 
selves upon  the  Plan  of  Union,  and  w^ere  Presbyterian 
only  in  name.* 

In  1812,  these  three  Presbyteries,  Geneva,  Cayuga., 
and  Onondaga,  were  erected  into  the  Synod  of  Geneva. 
This  body  received  an  early  enlargement,  in  conse- 
quence of  the  dissolution  of  the  Congregational  Asso- 
ciation of  Onondaga,  the  ministers  and  churches  of 
which  connected  themselves  w^ith  its  Presbyteries,  on 
the  "  accommodating  plan.'' 

In  1821,  the  Synod  of  Genesee  was  erected  out  of 
four  Presbyteries  detached  from  the  Synod  of  Geneva. 
Springing  from  that  body,  which  traced  its  origin  so 
directly  to  the  plan  of  1808,  and  the  Middle  Associa- 
tion, this  Synod  was,  like  its  parent,  largely  composed 
of  Congregational  materials ;  and  the  Plan  of  Union 
was  recognized  as  paramount  to  the  Constitution  of  the 
Presbyterian  Church. 

The  Synod  of  Geneva,  at  a  later  period,  received  a 
new  accession  from  the  Congregational  churches.  In 
1826,  an  overture  came  before  the  Assemby,  ^^  for  the 
promotion  of  a  new  Presbytery,  in  the  county  of  Che- 

■*  For  tlie  facts  here  presented,  respecting  the  Synods  of  Geneva, 
Genesee,  and  Utica,  we  are  indebted  mainly  to  "Facts  and  Observa- 
tions concerning  the  organization  and  state  of  the  churches,  in  the 
three  Synods  of  Western   New  York  and  the  Synod  of  Western 

Reserve ;"  by  the  Eev.  Dr.  James  AVood,  1837. 
14  » 


162  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

nango  and  adjacent  parts,  in  the  State  of  New  York/' 
The  overture  was  granted,  and  the  Assembly  consti- 
tuted the  Presbytery  of  Chenango,  to  be  composed  of 
five  enumerated  ministers.  Not  a  church  was,  at  first, 
connected  with  the  body.  It  was  attached  to  the  Synod 
of  Geneva.* 

In  September  of  the  same  year,  at  the  second  meet- 
ing of  this  body,  it  adopted  an  accommodation  plan, 
grounded  on  that  of  1808  ;  allowing  churches  to  govern 
themselves  mainly  upon  Congregational  principles. 
Two  churches  then  joined  it.  Some  time  afterward, 
the  Union  Association  was  broken  up,  and  its  ministers 
and  churches  mostly  came  into  the  Presbytery. 

The  Synod  of  Utica  was  erected,  in  1829,  by  a  di- 
vision of  the  Synod  of  Albany,  and  was,  from  the  first, 
largely  composed  of  Congregational  materials,  under 
the  operation  of  the  Plan  of  1801.  The  Presbyteries 
of  which  it  was  constituted,  had  already  received 
repeated  accessions  of  Congregational  ministers  and 
churches,  under  the  Plan.  In  1819,  the  Presbytery  of 
Oneida  received  eleven  Congregational  ministers  and 
nine  congregations,  in  consequence  of  the  dissolution  of 
the  Oneida  Association ;  the  ministers  of  which  desir- 
ing to  join  the  Presbytery,  persuaded  their  churches  to 
acquiesce  in  the  step.  During  the  three  following  years, 
nine  churches  were  added  to  the  Presbytery ;  the  most 
of  them  Congregational. 

It  will  be  recognized,  at  once,  from  this  history,  that 

the  system  contemplated  in  the  Plan  of  Union  of  1801, 

was  essentially  modified  in  its  actual  operation.    Instead 

of  being  used,  strictly,  as   a  temporary  expedient,  for 

*  Assembly's  Minutes,  1826,  p.  21. 


THE  PLAN   OF   UNION.  163 

the  organization  of  mixed  churches,  where  both  parties 
were  too  feeble  to  attempt  independent  action,  and  for 
enabling  the  churches,  in  their  infant  condition,  to 
avail  themselves  of  the  services  of  such  ministers  as 
might  be  accessible,  whether  Presbyterian  or  Congrega- 
tional, without  aifecting  the  ecclesiastical  relations  of 
the  churches, — the  Plan  was  made  the  occasion  of  fill-'' 
ing  our  church  with  Congregational  ministers  and 
churches;  retaining  all  their  denominational  attach- 
ments and  usages ;  with  but  slight  modifications,  or 
none.  Their  congregational  aifairs  were  managed,  in  a 
great  measure,  independently  of  Presbyterial  control; 
and  yet  they  did  not  hesitate  to  send  delegates, — "  com- 
mittee men,'^  to  sit  in  Presbytery,  to  administer  a  Con- 
stitution to  which  they  themselves  refused  to  submit,  and 
govern  a  Church,  to  which  they  felt  no  attachment,  and 
with  the  destinies  of  which  they  refused  to  be  identified. 

Whilst  such  was  the  development  in  progress,  in 
western  New  York,  a  similar  process  was  going  on  in 
the  northern  part  of  Ohio.  The  following  history  of 
the  Synod  of  the  Western  Reserve,  is  given  by  the 
Rev.  J.  Seward,  one  of  its  earliest  pioneers. 

*'The  Presbytery  of  Grand  River,  agreeably  to  the 
order  of  the  Synod  of  Pittsburgh,  was  organized  in  the 
autumn  of  1814;  and,  as  it  covered  ground  on  which  a 
union  had  been  established  between  Presbyterians  and 
Congregationalists,  according  to  Regulations  adopted 
by  the  General  Assembly  of  the  Presbyterian  Church, 
it  was  deemed  necessary,  that  this  Presbytery  should 
be  so  organized  as  to  consolidate  and  perpetuate  this 
union,  and  thus  carry  out  the  recommendations  and 
injunctions  of  the  General  Assembly.     To  accomplish 


164  HISTOKY   OF   THE. NEW  SCHOOL. 

this  object,  a  number  of  articles,  adapted  to  the  pecu- 
liar situation  of  the  churches  in  this  region,  was  adopted 
by  this  Presbytery,  and  afterward  by  the  Presbyteries 
of  Portage  and  Huron,  as  they  were  respectively  organ- 
ized. The  design  of  these  articles  was,  to  secure  to  all 
connected  with  these  Presbyteries,  the  rights  and  privi- 
leges pledged  in  the  Regulations  adopted  by  the  Gene- 
ral Assembly  and  the  General  Association,  in  1801. 
As  the  Congregationalists  had,  from  their  childhood, 
been  instructed  in  the  Westminster  Assembly's  Shorter 
Catechism,  and,  as  this  was  the  basis  of  the  Presbyte- 
rian Confession  of  Faith,  they  had  no  material  diffi- 
culty in  coming  together  on  the  distinguishing  doctrines 
of  the  Christian  religion,  as  embraced  in  the  Calvinistic 
system.  Nor  had  they  any  objection  to  the  Discipline 
of  the  Presbyterian  Church,  so  far  as  it  was  applicable 
to  them,  in  their  peculiar  situation.  Hence,  in  their 
preamble  to  their  constitution,  they  express  their  appro- 
bation of  the  Confession  of  Faith  and  Discipline  of 
the  General  Assembly  of  the  Presbyterian  Church  in 
the  United  States  of  America ;  and,  in  the  articles  of 
the  constitution,  there  is  nothing  that  does  not  perfectly 
harmonize  with  the  standards  of  the  Presbyterian 
Church,  excepting  those  particulars  which  are  designed 
to  carry  out  the  principles  of  the  Plan  of  Union,  to 
which  allusion  has  so  often  been  made. 

"  The  distinguishing  particular,  of  this  description, 
was,  that  individual  ministers  and  churches  may  adopt 
either  the  Congregational  or  Presbyterian  mode  of  gov- 
ernment and  discipline  ;  and  that  this  article  shall  never 
be  affected  by  any  additions  or  alterations  which  these 
regulations   may  receive.      Here  is   the  grand  charLer 


THE    PL  AX    OF    UNION.  165 

of  contract  to  perpetuate  the   Plan   of  Union.      The 
minister  and    churches    forming   these   ncAV  Presbyte- 
ries   supposed    that    they   were   bound    to    make    this 
covenant   with    each    other,    by   the   express    direction 
of  the  General  Assembly  of  the  Presbyterian  Church. 
They   made    it.      They    inserted    it    prominently    in 
their  books   of  records.     The  records  of  the  Presby- 
tery  of   Grand   River,   containing  this   contract,   were 
presented  to  the  Synod  of  Pittsburgh,  at  their  meeting 
in  1815,  for  examination.     The  peculiar  circumstances 
of  the  Presbytery  being  understood,  a  committee  of  the 
most  wise  and  judicious  members  were  appointed   to 
examine  the  records.     The  committee  reported  and  the 
records  were  approved.     Thus  did  the  Synod  of  Pitts- 
burgh ratify  and  confirm,  in  1815,  the  covenant,  pro- 
posed and  adopted  by  the  General  Assembly,  in  1801, 
and  which  had  been  in  successful  operation,  in  the  new 
settlements,  for  the  period  of  fourteen  years.     In  1819, 
the  records  of  the  Presbytery  of  Portage,  and  in  1824, 
the  records  of  the  Presbytery  of  Huron,  each  contain- 
ing the  same  contract,  went  through  with  a  similar  pro- 
cess, and  were  approved  by  the  Synod  of  Pittsburgh. 
The  time  at  which  these  records  were  approved  was  at 
the  first  meeting  of  the  Synod  after  the  formation  of 
the  respective   Presbyteries  of  Grand  Piver,  Portage, 
and  Huron.     At  a  meeting  of  the  General  Assembly, 
in  1825,  a  petition  was  presented  for  a  division  of  the 
Synod  of  Pittsburgh,  and  the  erection  of  a  new  Synody 
to  be  composed  of  the  three  Presbyteries  above  named, 
and   to  be   known  by  the  name  of  the  Synod  of  the 
Western  Reserve.     The  request  Avas  granted,  and,  in 
compliance  with  the  order  of  the  General  Assembly, 


166  HISTOHY   OF    THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

the  Synod   of  the  Western  Reserve  was  organized,  at 
Hudson,  September  27,  1825.'^* 

Whilst,  thus,  in  four  great  Synods,  the  Plan  of  1<S01 
had  wholly  superseded  the  constitution  of  the  Church, 
similar  results,  although  to  a  more  limited  extent,  were 
realized  in  other  parts  of  the  Church.  Its  energies 
were  gradually  relaxed,  its  authority  weakened,  and 
instead  of  the  Plan  converting  Congregationalists  into 
Presbyterians,  the  opposite  result  was  imminent, — the 
Congregationalizing  of  the  entire  Presbyterian  Church. 

When  the  Regulations  were  adopted,  the  ministers 
of  New  England,  and  especially  those  of  Connecticut, 
were  supposed  to  be  thoroughly  sound  in  the  theology 
of  the  standards  of  Westminster,  and  favorable  to  the 
Presbyterian  order,  set  forth  by  that  Assembly.  The 
leaven  of  Hopkins  was  but  beginning  to  work.  But 
within  a  third  of  a  century  afterward  a  great  change 
had  taken  place.  The  system  of  New  Haven  was  fully 
matured  and  diffusing  its  poison  everywhere.  With 
the  prevalence  of  lax  and  unsound  theology,  there 
occurred  a  reaction  from  the  strictness  of  the  Presby- 
terian discipline, — the  counterpart  of  a  purely  Calvin- 
istic  theology, — and  a  disposition  was  strongly  devel- 
oped, hostile  even  to  the  milder  forms  of  the  Consocia-  ' 
tional  polity  of  Connecticut.  The  multiplication,  there- 
fore, of  Conp:re2:ational  ministers,  in  the  Presbvterian 
Church,  was  no  increase  of  strength ;  but  the  introduc- 
tion of  an  element  of  weakness,  division,  and  heresy. 
For  the  present,  it  seemed  to  be  a  pledge  of  prosperity 
and  peace.  But  time  only  was  requisite,  to  reveal  its 
true  character.    ^^ 

*  Seward's  letter  to  the  Ohio  Observer,  in  AVoods'  Facts  and  Ob- 
servations, p.  29. 


.      CHAPTER  XI. 

NEW   ENGLAND   THEOLOGY. 

Influence  of  Edwards — His  theory  of  imputation — Realistic  and  Re- 
formed doctrines — Edwards'  doctrine  of  sin  and  holiness — Logical 
development  of  Hopkinsianism — Hopkins  a  pupil  of  Edwards — 
The  system  of  New  Divinity — Results  of  the  doctrine  of  sin  and 
holiness  seen  in  the  younger  Edwards'  doctrine  of  the  atonement — 
Relation  of  Edwards  to  New  Haven — Its  logical  development. 

Prior  to  the  rise  of  Edwards,  the  theology  of  New 
EDglaiid  had  always  been  strictly  conformed  to  that 
of  the  body  of  the  Reformed  Churches.  His  own  theo- 
logical views,  as  to  the  doctrines  of  the  Reformed  con- 
fessions, were  in  general  harmony  with  the  Westminister 
divines.  In  two  respects,  however,  he  must  be  recog-  ** 
nized  as  the  spring,  whence  have  flowed  many  heresies, 
to  plague  the  Church  of  God,  which  he  loved; — in  the  ► 
nature  of  some  of  his  opinions  ;  and  in  the  mode  of  dis- 
cussion which  he  introduced.  Holding,  in  accordance 
with  the  Cartesian  j)hilosophy,  then  prevalent,  that  ^ 
God  himself  is  the  only  cause  of  all  phenomena  and 
events,  he  hence  deduced  his  extraordinary  theory  of 
identity,  and  incorporated  it  with  the  fundamental  doc- 
trines of  theology.  There  is  no  such  thing,  according  to 
this  view,  as  real  continued  existence  among  the  crea- 
tures. The  moon  that  now  is,  is  not  really  the  same 
that  was  a  moment  ago.     That,  has  fled  into  nothing- 

167 


168  HISTORY   OF   THE    XEW   SCHOOL. 

ness  ;  and  this,  is  a  new  creation,  which  is  in  the  act  of 
giving  place  to  another ;  and  so  on  continually.  Upon 
this  assumption,  he  proceeds  to  reason  thus. — "  If  the 
existence  of  created  substance,  in  each  successive  mo- 
ment, be  wholly  the  effect  of  God's  immediate  power, 
in  that  moment ;  without  any  dependence  on  prior 
existence ;  as  much  as  the  first  creation  out  of  noth- 
ing,— then,  what  exists  at  this  moment,  by  this  power, 
is  a  new  effect ;  and,  simply  and  absolutely  considered, 
not  the  same  with  any  past  existence ;  though  it 
be  like  it,  and  follows  it  according  to  a  certain  estab- 
lished method.  And  there  is  no  identity  or  oneness 
in  the  case,  but  ivhat  depends  on  the  arbitrary  constitution 
of  the  Creator,  who,  by  his  wise  sovereign  establishment, 
so  unites  these  successive  new  effects,  that  he  treats 
them  as  one,  by  communicating  to  them  like  properties, 
relations  and  circumstances ;  and  so  leads  us  to  regard 
and  treat  them  as  one."  This  divine  constitution,  he 
says  is  ^^the  thing  which  makes  truth,  in  affairs  of  this 
sort."  By  such  a  "  constitution,"  hQ  asserts  that  God 
made  Adam  and  his  posterity  to  be  one,  so  as  to  involve 
the  imputation  of  his  sin  to  them. 

That  is,  when  "  he  spake,  and  it  was  done,  he  com- 
manded and  it  stood  fast,"  God  did  not  give  permanent 
exis-tence  to  anything.  He  only  arranged  matters  so  as 
to  mislead  the  popular  mind  into  that  belief,  by  a  ^'  con- 
stitution" of  so  strange  a  character,  that  whilst  the 
divine  sovereignty  "  makes  truth"  out  of  the  really 
false  appearances,  it  is  truth  of  a  texture  so  flimsy  that 
the  acuteness  of  this  philosophy  detects  and  exposes 
it,  as  unreal  and  deceptive.  And  so  in  regard  to  our 
relation  to  Adam. 


I 


NEW    ENGLAND    THEOLOGY.  169 

On  this  subject,  two  diverse  views  had  obtained  more 
or  less  currency,  in  the  Reformed  Church,  prior  to  Ed- 
wards. The  first  was  the  doctrine  of  the  mediseval 
realists,  who  held,  that  human  nature  is  an  impersonal 
substance,  created  in  Adam  and  diffused  from  him  to 
his  posterity,  each  individual  being  a  mere  pheno- 
menon or  mode  of  this  substance.  This  nature  had  a 
will  of  its  own,  which  apostatized  from  God,  and  car- 
ried with  it.^in  the  fall,  Adam  and  all  the  race. 

The  other  view  was  more  generally  prevalent;  and' 
was  embodied  in  all  the  Reformed  confessions.  Accord-, 
ing  to  it,  we  "  being  in  Adam's  loins,  as  branches  in  the 
root,  and  comprehended  in  the  same  covenant,"*  "  sinned 
in  him  and  fell  with  him,  in  his  first  transgression." 
As  Boston  clearly  expresses  it,  "We  are  not  only  made 
liable  to  punishment,  by  this  disobedience,  but  we  are 
made  sinners  by  it.  Not  only  is  the  guilt  ours,  but  the 
fault  is  ours :  we  not  only  die  in  Adam,  1  Cor.  xv.  22,  but 
we  sinned  in  him,  as  our  federal  head,  Rom.  v.  12;  we 
broke  the  covenant  in  him ;  that  breach,  in  law  reckon- 
ing, is  ours ;  and  is  reckoned  ours,  because  it  is  ours,  by 
virtue  of  our  being  one  with  him,  in  his  loins,  as  our  \ 
natural  and  federal  head."t 

"  It  is  reckoned  ours,  because  it  is  ours."  Here,  pre-  ^ 
cisely,  is  the  point  of  difference  between  the  old,  the 
true.  Reformed  theology,  and  the  Edwardean  theory. 
The  former  teaches  that  ^ve  are,  by  generation  one  «■ 
with  Adam,  and,  therefore,  so  treated  in  the  covenant. 
Edwards  inverts  this  order,  and  teaches  that  we  are 
regarded  and  treated  as  one  with  him ;  and  are  thus, 

*  Westminster  Assembly's  "  Sum  of  Saving  Doctrine,"  Head  i.  §  3. 
f  Boston  on  the  Covenant  of  Works,  Head  iii. 
15 


170  HISTORY   OF    THE    NEW    SCHOOL. 

contrary  to  the  real  fact,  "  constituted"  one  Avlth  him, 
and,  therefore,  legally,  so  recognized  and  dealt  with. 

In  addition  to  Edwards'  metaphysical  gloss  upon  the 
doctrine  of  imputation,  lie  held  and  propagated  two  or 
three  pregnant  errors.  The  first  was,  that  all  sin-  con- 
sists in  selfishness  ;  and  all  holiness  or  virtue,  in  disin- 
terested benevolence.  The  second  grows  out  of  this. — 
If  holiness  consists  in  disinterested  benevolence,  God, 
when  he  brought  creation  into  existence,  was,  bound,  as 
a  holy  being,  to  produce  that  system  which  would 
secure  the  greatest  possible  amount  of  happiness  to  the 
universe.  Edwards  also  insisted  upon  the  distinction 
between  natural  and  moral  ability.  Of  the  latter, 
only,  is  the  sinner  devoid,  with  respect  to  evangelical 
obedience. 

The  peculiarities  of  Edwards  have,  in  themselves,  a 
very  harmless  appearance.  But,  not  only  did  they  in- 
volve consequences  which  he  would  have  utterly  repu- 
diated,—^they  were,  moreover,  so  incorporated  by  him 
into  his  doctrinal  system  of  theology,  that,  when  they 
are  taken  away,  nothing  but  a  wreck  remains.  In  this 
respect,  his  influence  has  been  most  disastrous,  leaving 
his  disciples  afloat  on  the  deep,  without  guiding  star  or 
compass.  "  New  England  theology,"  in  all  its  phases, 
is  characterized  by  the  adoption  of  Ed^yards'  definitions 
of  sin  and  holiness ;  and  ]>y  a  rejection  of  the  doctrine 
of  imputation;  identified  as  it  was  supposed  to  be  with 
his  doctrine  of  identity. 

The  first  fruits  of  Edwards'  speculations  were  seen 
in  the  teachings  of  Hopkins,  West,  Spring,  Emmons, 
the  younger  Edwards,  and  their  followers.  The  school 
of  Emmons,  ^vith   unflinching  courage  and  logic,  fol- 


NEW  ENGLAND  THEOLOGY.  171 

lowed  out  the  premises  to  their  legitimate  consequences. 
The  larger  number  of  Edwarcleans  stopped  short,  in 
the  milder  system,  which  goes  by  the  name  of  Hop- 
kins. The  logical  process  was  brief  and  simple,  and 
the  conclusions  inevita.ble.  If  the  creatures  be  no 
causes, — if  God  be  the  sole  and  immediate  cause  of  all 
effects,  he  and  he  only  is  the  cause  of  sin,  in  Adam  and 
in  us.  If  there  be  no  powers  in  man's  nature, — if  the 
phenomena  of  his  affections  and  actions  are  the  imme- 
diate effects  of  the  power  of  God, — there  can  be,  in  him, 
no  native  tendencies  and  dispositions,  either  sinful  or 
holy.  These  qualities  can  only  be  predicated  of  exer- 
cises or  acts  of  the  will  and  affections.  If  Adam's 
nature  is  no  cause  to  his  posterity,  it  does  not  cause 
their  depravity ;  God,  the  only  cause,  must  in  some 
way,  be  its  author.  If  we  are  one  with  Adam,  only 
by  a  ^^constitution,''  making  seeming  truth  out  of  a 
falsehood,  then  he  was  only  seemingly,  and  not  really 
and  truly,  our  head ;  and,  hence,  could  not  have  been, 
and  was  not,  our  covenant  head  and  representative. 
No  covenant,  therefore,  was  made  w^ith  him,  for  his 
posterity.  His  sin  was  not  their  sin.  They  did  not, 
in  him,  break  the  covenant,,  and  justice  cannot,  there- 
fore, exact  its  penalty  of  them.  God  may,  in  sove- 
reignty, act  toward  us  as  he  would  toward  sinners,  but 
the  inflictions  so  visited  upon  us,  on  account  of  Adam's 
sin,  cannot  be,  in  any  proper  sense,  punitive  nor  judi- 
cial. For  the  same  reason,  Christ  could  not  so  unite 
himself  to  us  as  to  covenant  for  us,  or  to  be  held 
accountable  to  justice  for  our  sins.  Nor,  on  the  other 
hand,  can  we,  by  union  with  him,  acquire  a  property  in 
his  righteousness.      The   consequence  is,  that  Christ's 


172  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

atonement  is  denied  any  properly  vicarious  character. 
It  was  a  govermental  display,  not  a  satisfaction ;  it  was 
made  for  sin,  in  general,  and  not  specifically  for  the  sins 
of  his  elect;  and  his  work  was  not  determinate  of  the 
redemption  of  a  covenant  people,  but  only  made  way  ■ 
for  the  salvation  of  those  who  shall  believe.  The  sys- 
tem ignores  and  precludes  the  spiritual  union  of  Christ 
and  the  believer, — that  union  which  fills  so  large  a 
U  place  in  the  old  theology  of  the  Church,  and  a  know- 
ledge of  which  our  fathers  thought  of  so  much  import- 
ance to  the  maintenance  of  vital  religion. 

Such  were  the  teachings  of  the  earlier  disciples  of 
Edwards.  Some  of  them  still  clung  to  his  untenable 
appeal  to  the  distinction  between  a  2)rivative  and  a  posi- 
tive cause,  to  account  for  God's  agency  in  the  produc- 
tion of  sin.  Untenable, — for,  if  God  be  the  only  cause, 
as  Edwards  insists,  what  avails  the  distinction  ?  Priva- 
tive, or  positive,  God  is  tlie  cause.  From  this  diffi- 
culty, many  took  refuge  in  ambiguous  phrases ;  whilst 
others  did  not  hesitate  to  attribute  all  their  sins  directly 
to  the  efficiency  of  God.  But  they  fell  back  upon  the 
optimistic  theory,  and  maintained  that,  since  God  was 
bound  to  produce  the  best  possible  system,  and  is  a 
most  powerful  and  excellent  being,  we  are  shut  up  to 
the  conclusion  that  the  present  svstem  is  the  best :  and, 
sin  being  found  in  this  system,  we  must  conclude  it  to 
be  an  incident  of  the  best  system,  and  necessary  to  it. 
Sin,  therefore,  is  not,,  upon  the  whole,  an  evil,  but  a 
good.  Hence,  it  is  consistent  with  God's  holiness  to 
produce  it.  It  is  only  evil,  in  that  the  sinner  is  actuated 
by  no  such  apprehension,  but  by  selfish  and  malevolent 
feelings.     Retaining  partially  the  old  forms  of  speech, 


NEW   ENGLAND   THEOLOGY.  173 

these  theologians  utterly  rejected  the  old  doctrines  of 
original  sin, — the  atonement  and  justification. 

The  new  divinity  was  first  presented  to  the  public,  in 
systematic  form,  in  Hopkins'  "System  of  Doctrines,''  .» 
which  was  published  in  1793.  Its  author,  the  Rev. 
Samuel  Hopkins  of  Newport,  was  not  only  a  personal 
pupil  of  the  elder  Edwards,  with  whom  he  resided,  as 
a  student  of  theology, — but  was  also  his  literary  ex- 
ecutor. 

"  Upon  the  death  of  Mr.  Edwards,  Mrs.  Edwards, 
in  consequence  of  verbal  directions,  given  to  her  by  Mr. 
Edwards,  in  his  life-time,  put  all  his  manuscripts  and 
his  library  into  my  hands  and  care,"  says  Hopkins,  in 
his  autobiography ;  "  his  manuscripts  to  be  disposed  of 
by  me,  and  two  other  ministers.  And  Mrs.  Edwards 
solicited  me  to  write  the  life  of  Mr.  Edwards,  to  be 
published,  with  a  number  of  sermons,  to  be  selected 
from  his  manuscripts."  He  complied  with  the  request, 
and  says  that  "  as  these  manuscripts  were  in  my  hands 
a  number  of  years,  I  paid  my  chief  attention  to  them, 
until  I  had  read  them  all ;  which  consisted  of  a  large 
number  of  volumes,  some  of  them  large,  besides  ser- 
mons ;  of  which  sermons,  I  did  not  read  the  whole.  In 
doing  this,  I  had  much  pleasure  and  profit.  My  mind 
became  more  engaged  in  study,  rising,  great  part  of  my 
time,  at  four  o'clock  in  the  morning,  to  pursue  my  study, 
in  which  I  took  great  pleasure."*  So  intimately  were 
Edwards  and  Hopkins  related ;  and  so  thoroughly  was 
the  mind  of  the  latter  imbued  and  moulded  by  the 
teacliings  of  the  former. 

The  following  were  some  of  the  leading  points  of 

*  Hopkins'  Autobiography,  edited  by  West,  Hartford,  1805,  p.  57. 
15  » 


174  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

peculiarity,  in  tlie  system,  which,  in  contradistinction  to 
Old  Calvinism,  was,  by  its  advocates,  early  styled,  the 
New  Divinity. 

1.  Holiness  consists  altogether  in  disinterested  be- 
nevolence. 

2.  All  sin  consists  in  selfishness. 

3.  All  holiness  and  sin  consist  in  voluntary  exercises 
or  actions. 

4.  The  moral  law  is  the  rule  of  duty,  because  it  is 
founded  in  the  nature  and  fitness  of  things ;  and,  there-  ' 
fore,  God  could  not  but  promulgate  and  enforce  it. 

5.  Adam's  sin  is  not  imputed  to  his  posterity ;  but 
by  a  divine  "constitution"  it  was  determined  that  if  he, 
the  father,  should  sin,  all  his  posterity  should  also  be- 
come sinners. 

6.  The  depravity  into  which  man  is  fallen  is  wholly 
of  his  will;  and  is  total,  because  the  will  is  entirely 
prone  to  evil.  But  it  is  not  universal,  inasmuch  as  the 
understanding  and  conscience  remain,  at  least,  partially 
unimpaired. 

7.  Men  are  possessed  of  a  natural  ability  to  do  all  the 
will  of  God.  They  are  sinners,  only  because  of  indis- 
position of  will,  to  what  is  right. 

8.  Christ's  obedience  and  sufferings  were  fulfilled  by 
him,  not  distinctively,  as  the  Plead  of  his  body,  the 
elect ;  but  as,  in  general,  the  substitute  for  sinners ;  in 
whom  is  made  an  exluhition  of  divine  justice,  in  conse- 
quence of  which  God  can  safely  and  consistently  bestow 
pardon  on  whomsoever  he  Vvill.  It  is  not,  however, 
such  in  its  nature  as  to  involve  a  demand  of  justice  for 
the  salvation,  specifically,  of  any. 

9.  In  order  to  true  faith,  we  must  feel  perfect  ac- 


KEW  e:xgland  theology.  175 

quiescence  in  the  will  of  God,  though  it  demand  our 
perdition. 

10.  Faith  implies  a  right  taste  and  disposition.  It 
thus  shows  the  heart  to  be  in  harmony  with  the  mind 
of  Christ;  and,  so,  renders  it  fit  and  proper  that  the 
Mediator's  righteousness  should  be  reckoned  in  the 
party's  favor.  Christ's  righteousness  does  not,  how- 
ever, become  the  property  of  the  believer,  but  it  consti- 
tutes the  meritorious  ground  for  the  acceptance  of  his 
faith  for  righteousness. 

11.  God,  as  a  holy  being,  is  bound,  in  all  his  works, 
to  do  that  which  is  wisest  and  best ;  whence  we  may 
conclude  the  present  system,  sin  included,  to  be  the  best 
j)ossible  system. 

12.  Hence,  upon  the  whole,  sin  is  not  an  evil;  but 
incident  to  the  greatest  good ;  and,  as  such  is  caused  by 
the  efficient  agency  of  God.  Moral  good  and  evil  are 
equally  the  consequences  of  the  divine  disposal.  Here, 
division  arose.  While  Hopkins  and  others  talked 
obscurely,  and  left  it  undecided,  whether  the  divine 
efficiency  employs  different  modes  of  operation,  concern- 
ing the  production  of  good  and  evil,  Emmons  did  not 
hesitate  to  accept  the  logical  conclusion  from  the  prem- 
ises; and  to  insist  that  sin  and  righteousness  are,  in 
the  same  manner,  the  results  of  the  agency  of  the  Only 
Cause. 

In  another  line  of  deduction,  the  teachings  of  Edwards 
were,  in  their  consequences,  fatal  to  the  gospel.  No 
point  of  theology  can  be  more  important  and  vital  than 
that  which  is  involved  in  the  exposition  of  the  moral 
character  of  God.  An  exhaustive  answer  to  the  ques- 
tion, AVhat  is  God  ?  would  contain  all  theology ;  and  a 


176  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

false  definition  of  any  one  of  the  divine  attributes,  as  it 
would  infuse  poison  into  the  fountain-head,  must  convey 
death  through  all  the  streams.     How  evidently  must 
this  be  the  case,  if  such  a  definition  should  obscure  or 
obliterate  some  of  the  most  conspicuous  attributes  of 
the  divine  nature !     Yet  this,  and  no  less,  was  done  by 
Edwards,  in  his  definitions  of  sin  and  holiness.     "  All 
sin  is  selfishness;"  and  "All  holiness  or  virtue  is  disin- 
terested   benevolence."      The   holiness   of  God   is   the 
consummate  attribute,  comprehensive  of  all  the  moral 
perfections  of  the  divine  nature.     If  this  all-embracing 
attribute  is   adequately  described  by  disinterested  be- 
nevolence, it  is   manifest   that   the  divine  character  is 
divested  of  every  moral  perfection  not  included  in  this 
definition.       If    disinterested    benevolence    covers    and 
controls  the  whole  case,   then,  justice  and   truth   are 
subordinate,  and  their  exercise  must  be  determined,  not 
by  their  own   several   claims,  but  by  the  demands  of 
benevolence.    In  a  word,  they  are  excluded  from  among 
the  essential  attributes  of  God.      The  divine  adminis- 
tration, determined  by  disinterested  benevolence,  may 
sometimes  seem  to  conform  to  their  requirements,  but 
may  also  utterly  disregard  them,  if  benevolence  should 
require  it.     The  doctrine,  therefore,  that  God  is  "a  just 
God  and  an  avenger,"  means  nothing,  and  is  ignored ; 
whilst  the  fact  that  he  "  is  of  great  kindness"  is  sup- 
posed to   determine   every  issue  in  his  moral  govern- 
ment. 

Now,  whilst  it  is  true  that  the  loving-kindness  of 
God  is  largely  insisted  on  in  his  Word,  it  is  also  true 
that  his  truth  and  justice  or  righteousness  are  exhibited 
as  entirely  distinct  from  the  other,  and  every  way  as 


KEW    ENGLAND    THEOLOGY.  177 

essential,  conspicuous  and  prevalent,  in  determining  the 
plans  and  administration  of  the  Most  High.  If  mercy- 
goes  before  his  face,  it  is  in  the  companionshi])  of  truth; 
while  justice  and  judgment  are  the  habitation  of  his 
throne.  And  the  whole  problem  of  the  gospel  was,  to 
discover  how  God  could  be  just,  and  yet  good  to  men; 
and  its  glory  is  that  on  behalf  of  sinners,  mercy  and 
truth  have  m^t  together,  righteousness  and  peace  have 
kissed  each  other,  in  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ. 

As  relating  to  systematic  theology,  Edwards'  defini- 
tions were  effectual,  in  the  hands  of  his  son,  the  younger 
Edwards,  in  essentially  modifying  the  doctrines  of  the 
atonement  and  justification.  On  this  subject,  three 
sermons,  preached  by  him,  were  of  signal  importance. 
"  They  did  much  toward  changing  the  previously  com- 
mon mode  of  thinking  and  teaching,  on  the  subject; 
and  led  to  the  adoption  of  those  consistent  and  scrip- 
tural views,"  says  Dr.  Pond,  "  which  have  since  gene- 
rally prevailed  among  the  evangelical  clergy  of  New 
England."* 

The  discourses,  which  occupy  so  iiiportant  a  position 
in  the  history  of  New  England  doctrines,  have  in  view 
the  obviating  of  a  Socinian  objection,  which  the  author 
thus  states :  "  If  we  be,  in  the  literal  sense,  forgiven, 
in  consequence  of  a  redemption,  we  are  forgiven  on 
account  of  the  price  of  redemption,  previously  paid. 
How,  then,  can  we  truly  be  said  to  be  fo7'glvcn  ;  a  word 
which  implies  the  exercise  of  grace  ?  And,  especially, 
how  can  we  be  said  to  be  forgiven,  according  to  the 
riches  of  grace  f  This  is,  at  least,  a  seeming  incon- 
sistency. If  our  forgiveness  be  purchased,  and  the 
*  Dr.  Pond,  in  Biblical  Repository,  1844,  p.  379. 


178  HISTORY    OF    THE    NEW    SCHOOL. 

price  already  paid,  it  seems  to  be  a  matter  of  debt  and 
not  of  grace." 

To  tliis,  the  true  and  scriptural  answer  is  found  in 
the  words  of  Christ, — "  I  and  my  Father  are  one." 
True,  justice  is  fully  satisfied ;  the  debt  is  paid;  and 
so,  justification  is  by  process  of  law,  at  the  tribunal  of 
justice.  But  it  is  God  who  has  paid  the  debt.  And, 
not  content,  merely  to  blot  out  the  handwriting*  of 
condemnation, — not  satisfied  with  a  mere  removal  of 
the  curse, — he  has  procured  for  us  a  perfect  righteousness, 
not  only  sufficient  to  secure  acquittal  at  the  bar^  but  to 
confer  a  full  title  to  life  and  glory.  And  is  not  this 
riches  of  grace  ?  ^^  He  hath  raised  us  up  together  and 
made  us  sit  together,  in  heavenly  places,  in  Christ 
Jesus ;  that,  in  the  ages  to  come,  he  might  show  the 
exceedhig  riches  of  his  grace,  in  his  kindness  toward  us, 
through  Christ  Jesus." 

The  objection  was  anticipated  and  answered  by  the 
Westminster  divines.*  But,  in  the  estimation  of  Dr. 
Edwards,  there  is  no  grace,  if  the  law  and  justice  of 
God  are  satisfied.  Justice,  he  discriminates  as  of  three 
kinds.  The  first  is  eommutative  justice,  "  which  respects 
property  and  matters  of  commerce,  solely ;  and  secures 
to  every  man  his  own  property."  But,  although  the 
Scriptures  use  the  terms,  redemption,  ransom,  bought 
with  a  price, — these  "  are  metaphorical  expressions,  and 
therefore  not  literally  and  exactly  true.  We  had  not 
deprived  God  of  his  pro})erty ;  we  had  not  robbed 
the  treasury  of  heaven.  God  was  possessed  of  as 
much  property,  after  the  fall  as  before ;  the  universe 
and  the  fullness  thereof  still  remained  his.     Therefore, 

*  Confession  of  Faith,  xi.  3. 


NEW    ENGLAND    THEOLOGY.  179 

when  Clirist  made  satisfaction,  he  refunded  no  pro- 
perty/' 

Docs  this  mean,  that  there  can  be  no  property  in  any- 
thino^  that  does  not  have  a  monev  value  ?  And,  that 
there  can  be  no  debt  nor  payment  that  is  not  pecuniary  ? 
Do  we  owe  God  nothing  at  all?  Commutative  justice 
is,  of  course,  by  Dr.  Edwards,  put  out  of  the  account. 
Christ  paid  no  money  for  us. 

The  second  kind  of  justice,  named  by  Edwards,  is 
distributive  justice,  by  which  a  man  is  treated  according 
to  his  personal  character  or  conduct.  ^^  Nor  is  distribu- 
tive justice  satisfied.  If  it  were,  there  would  be  no 
more  grace  in  the  discharge  of  the  sinner,  than  there  is 
in  the  discharge  of  a  criminal,  when  he  hath  endured 
the  full  punishment,  to  which,  according  to  law,  he  had 
been  condemned." 

If,  then,  the  judge  were  to  take  the  condemned  crimi- 
nal's place,  in  the  dungeon,  that  the  transgressor  may 
go  free,  there  would  be  no  grace  in  this ! 

The  third  kind  of  justice,  is  general  ov  imblie  justice, 
and  comprehends  all  moral  goodness.  "  To  practice 
justice  in  this  sense,  is  to  practice  agreeably  to  the  dic- 
tates of  general  l)enevolence."  This  it  is,  which,  ac- 
cord In  2:  to  Dr.  Edwards,  is  satisfied  In  the  atonement  of 
Christ.  But  of  this  third  kind  of  justice,  he  states 
that  '^  as  this  is  improperly  called  justice,  as  it  compre- 
hends all  moral  goodness,  it  is  not  at  all  opposed  to 
grace;  but  comprehends  that,  as  well  as  every  other 
virtue;  as,  truth,  faithfulness,  meekness,  forgiveness, 
patience,"  etc.  So,  tlien,  this  all-comprehending  grace, 
of  general,  or  disinterested,  benevolence,  does  not  in- 
clude justice,  properly  so  called.     To  save  appearances, 


180  ■  HISTORY   OF   THE    NEW   SCHOOL. 

the  name  is  given  to  an  attribute,  to  which  Edwards 
admits  it  does  not  belong.  It  is  not  justice;  and  that 
attribute  is  formally  excluded  from  the  scheme,  as  in- 
consistent with  grace.  The  end  of  the  whole  matter  is, 
either,  that  justice  is  not  an  attribute  of  God ;  or,  that, 
in  the  salvation  of  men,  by  the  blood  of  Christ,  violence 
is  done  to  it,  and  for  ever,  even  in  heaven,  must  the 
blood-bought  throng  be  under  its  frown.  In  either 
case,  justice  is  excluded  from  any  part  in  the  adminis- 
tration of  God.  "Justice  and  judgment  are"  no  longer 
"  the  habitation  of  his  throne !"  Then,  woe,  to  the 
universe  !  woe  to  his  own  people  ! 

To  this  theory  of  the  atonement,  Dr.  N.  S.  S.  Beman 

'  is  fully  committed  ;  while  it,  more  or  less  pervades  and 
enfeebles  all  the  writings  of  Mr.  Barnes,  on  the  subject. 
The  New  Divinity,  by  degrees,  spread  through  the 
churches  of  New  England,  during  the  closing  years  of 
O  the  last,  and  the  first  quarter  of  the  present  century. 
Then  arose  the  school  at  New  Haven,  for  the  propaga- 
tion of  the  system,  developed  by  the  professors  there ; 
and  it  is  a  significant  fact,  that  the  first  formal  announce- 
ment of  a  new  school  of  doctrine,  by  those  divines,  ad- 
dressed a  challenge  to  the  optimists  of  the  prevalent 
school,  to  justify  themselves  in  assuming  that  God  could 

f  prevent  all  sin  in  a  moral  system.     Thus,  the  fatalism, 

i  which  was  involved  in  the  Edwardean  theory  of  divine 
£  efldciency,  induced  a  recoil  to  the  opposite  extreme,  in 
i  .  the  assertion  of  the  Pelagian  heresy  of  free-will ;  and,  by 
both,  the  whole  system  of  biblical  theology  was  cor- 
rupted, with  doctrines  having  no  pretence,  even,  to  a 
scriptural  basis ;  but  growing  wholly  out  of  false 
j)hilosophy. 


NEAV   ENGLAND   THEOLOGY.  181 

The  divines  of  New  Haven  found,  in  the  very  heart 
of  the  Hojiklnsian  system,  some  of  the  fundamental  and 
most  efficient  principles  of  the  Pelagian  heresy. — That 
Adam  was  not  the  cause  of  his  posterity ; — tliat,  conse- 
quently, they  were  not  in  him,  in  the  covenant ; — that 
they  are  not,  therefore,  punishable  for  the  first  sin ;  nor 
is  depravity  derived  from  him  to  them ;  and,  that  sin 
consists,  only,  in  exercise,  or  action.  Accepting  these, 
as  unquestionable  principles,  and  recoiling,  with  just 
abhorrence,  from  the  idea  that  God  is  the  author  of 
men's  sins,  they  adopted  the  alternative,  deducible  from 
the  same  premises ;  and  concluded  that  men  are  created 
without  moral  character ;  and  that  their  depravity  and 
sins  are  the  result  of  circumstances,  and  beyond  the  con- 
trol of  God  ;  and  that  regeneration  is  the  effect  of  moral 
suasion,  and  not  wrought  by  the  immediate  agency  of 
the  Spirit  of  God. 

Boldly  repudiating  the  system  of  "constituted"  rela- 
tions and  fictitious  Intendments,  which  the  Hopkins- 
ians  generally  insisted  on,  the  New  Haven  school,  openly 
and  unequivocally,  denied  Adam  to  have  been  the 
representative  of  his  race,  or  Christ  of  his  people.  They 
held  that  every  man  comes  into  the  world  in  the  same 

moral  and  leg-al  attitude  in  which  Adam  was  created. , . 
.  .  .  '\f 

Each  one  sins  and  falls,  for  himself,  by  his  own  free 

will.     Christ  died, — not  as   a  legal  substitute  for  his 

people,  a  vicarious  expiation  for  their  sins, — but  as  an 

exhibition  of  the  love  of  God  to  sinners,  and  a  display  ^ 

of  the  evil  of  sin,  its  just  desert,  and  the  goodness  of 

God,  in  passing  it  by ;  so  that,  consistently  with  the 

welfare  of  the  universe,  he  may  forgive  sin.     Thus,  the 

sinner  is  pardoned,  and  not  justified ;  sin  is  forgiven, 

16 


182  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

not  blotted  out;  and  justice  is  waived,  not  satisfied. 
Again,  inasmuch  as  man's  free  will  sins,  and  can  sin,  in 
spite  of  God's  opposing  power,  it  follows,  that  the  re- 
generation and  conversion  of  the  sinner  are  beyond  the 
power  of  the  Spirit  of  God.  All  he  can  do,  is  to  pre- 
sent the  motives  to  the  sinner's  mind,  which  should  in- 
duce him  to  turn  from  his  sins.  The  rest  must  be  the 
product  of  man's  free  will.  Eegeneration  is,  therefore, 
to  be  accomplished  only  by  means  of  moral  suasion. 
Man  is  thus  induced  to  exert  his  own  powers,  which 
are  altogether  adequate  to  turn  from  sin  unto  God. 

Such  is  the  nexus  of  the  system,  the  seeds  of  wliich 
were  planted  in  the  theology  of  ^e\v  England  by  the 
genius  of  Edwards.  Germinating,  under  the  stimulus 
given  by  his  writings,  to  metaphysical  speculations  in 
theology,  the  scheme  has  reached  a  position  where  it  is 
impossible  to  remain,  and,  upon  which,  logically,  the 
only  advance  can  be  to  the  open  adoption  of  the  more 
specious  heresy  of  Arius,  or  the  avowed  Deism  of  So- 
cinus.  Already,  an  infinite  atoning  Priest  and  King 
and  an  almighty  Renewer  and  Sanctifier  are  eliminated 
from  the  system  ;  and  the  divinity  of  the  Son  and  Spirit 
of  God,  although  acknowledged,  is  meaningless  and 
inane.  The  whole  history,  is  a  mere  rehearsal,  in 
slightly  modified  form,  of  the  process  through  which 
the  Church  of  Geneva,  the  English  Presbyterians  and 
the  non-subscribers  of  Ulster,  in  the  eighteenth  cen- 
tury and  the  nineteenth,  passed ;  and  from  whence  they 
plunged  into  the  abyss  of  apostasy.  Such,  in  fact,  was 
the  result  of  the  ministry  of  the  younger  Edwards, 
himself;  who  was,  by  many,  held  to  have  been  as  much 
the  author  of  the  Hopkinsian  system  as  was  he  whose 


NEW   ENGLAND   THEOLOGY.  183 

name  it  bears.  For  twenty-six  years,  Edwards  minis- 
tered to  a  church  in  New  Haven ;  and  was  then  con- 
strained to  leave,  by  the  prevalence  of  Unitarian  and 
other  fatal  heresies  among  his  people, — the  proper  fruits 
of  a  quarter  of  a  century's  training  in  the  new  theology. 


CHAPTER   XII. 

'  NEW   HA  VEX   THEOLOGY. 

Early  history  of  Dr.  Taylor — Professor  Goodrich's  doctrines — Nettle- 
ton's  protest — A  new  seminary  contemplated — Theological  depart- 
ment of  Yale  enlarged — Dr.  Taylor  professor  of  Didactic  Theo- 
logy— "  New  Divinity" — Fitch's  Discourses  on  Sin — Taylor's  Con- 
cio  ad  Clerum — Can  God  prevent  sin  ? — Taylor  on  the  means  of 
regeneration — Beecher's  interposition — The  Andover  conference. 

As  early  as  1808,  Dr.  Taylor,  whilst  yet  a  student 
of  theology,  under  Dr.  Dwight,  had  given  occasion  for 
anxiety  to  the  friends  of  sound  doctrine,  by  his  views, 
then  developed.  Dr.  Nettleton,  who  was,  at  the  time, 
a  member  of  the  senior  class,  in  Yale  College,  says  of 
him : — "  We  then  differed  in  regard  to  the  nature  of 
the  doing's  of  the  unre2:enerate.  He  also  read  me  a 
dissertation  on  the  doctrine  of  the  divine  decrees,  and 
the  free  agency  of  man,  which  I  then  regarded  as  a  vir- 
tual denial  of  the  former,  and  an  avowal  of  the  self-de- 
termining power  of  the  will."* 

Dr.  Taylor  was  subsequently  settled  as  a  pastor  of  a 
church  in  New  Haven,  in  which  he  continued,  until 
called  to  the  ^professorship  of  theology.  In  1820  and 
1821,  a  discussion  was  in  progress,  on  the  Socinian  con- 
troversy, between  Professor  Woodg  of  Andover  and 
Dr.  Ware,  the  Unitarian  professor  of  divinity  in  Har- 

*  Letter  from  Nettleton,  April  30,  1839,  in  Hewit  MS. 
184 


NEW   HAVEN   THEOLOGY.  185 

vard.  Dr.  Taylor,  and  others  of  the  !N"ew  Haven  breth- 
ren, exj^ressed  great  dissatisfaction  with  the  positions 
taken  by  Dr.  Woods,  especially  on  the  subject  of  native 
depravity,  and  were  understood  to  aj^prove  the  views 
of  Dr.  Ware. 

Prior  to  this  date,  the  students  of  Yale,  who  were 
destined  to  the  ministry,  had,  generally,  and,  almost,  as 
a  matter  of  course,  gone  to  Andover,  to  study  theology. 
But,  about  this  time,  dissatisfaction  began  to  prevail  in 
Yale  College,  on  this  subject.  Through  the  Bible-class 
of  Professor  Goodrich,  sentiments  were  instilled  into 
the  minds  of  the  pious  youth,  which  purported  to  be  a 
reproduction  of  the  doctrines  of  the  elder  Edwards  and 
Bellamy;  from  which  the  professors  at  Andover  were 
charged  with  departing.  Thus,  insidiously,  was  the 
way  prepared  for  the  full  developments  which  followed. 

The  apprehensions,  which  these  indications  tended  to 
excite,  were  aggravated  by  the  report  of  doctrines  more 
formally  enunciated  in  a  lecture  by  Professor  Goodrich, 
to  his  pupils  in  Yale,  on  Saturday  evening,  December 
15,  1821.  He  commenced  by  stating  that  he  was  about 
to  present  a  diiferent  view  of  the  subject  of  his  lec- 
ture.— original  sin, — from  that  which  was  commonly 
held.  He  then  proceeded  to  set  forth  a  doctrine,  which 
the  better-informed  students  recoo-nizcd  as  bearincr  a 
striking  resemblance  to  that  with  which  Dr.  Ware  had 
opposed  Dr.  Woods.  During  the  preceding  winter.  Dr. 
Kettleton  had  been  occupied  some  time  preaching  in 
Kew  Haven,  in  an  extensive  revival.  With  him,  Dr. 
Beecher  s])ent  a  number  of  days,  laboring  in  the  work. 
^'  In  all  our  social  intercourse,"  says  Ncttleton,*  "  the 

*  Letter  from  Ncttleton,  April  24,  1839,  in  He  wit,  MS. 
16  * 


186  HISTOEY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

arguments  of  AVoods  and  Ware  seemed  to  form  the 
principal  topic  of  conversation.  Dr.  Beecher,  at  that 
time,  did  not  fully  agree  with  Dr.  Taylor,  and  they 
were  often,  as  I  expressed  it,  '  like  two  cocks,  by  the 
gills,' — Dr.  Taylor  clear  over  the  mark,  and  Dr.  Beecher 
so  far  over  that  I  could  agree  with  neither." 

When  the  report  went  abroad  of  Professor  Goodrich's 
lecture,  Nettleton  was  laboring  in  Dr.  Beecher's  church, 
at  Litchfield,  Connecticut.  The  latter  wrote  to  Dr. 
Taylor  on  the  subject  of  the  lecture.  He  did  not  fully 
approve  of  the  views  of  New  Haven ;  yet  made  such 
concessions  as  greatly  dissatisfied  Dr.  Nettleton,  who 
wrote  to  Dr.  Taylor,  "  With  all  my  love  and  respect  for 
brothers  Taylor,  and  Goodrich,  and  Beecher,  I  must 
say  that  neither  my  judgment,  nor  conscience,  nor  heart, 
can  acquiesce ;  and  I  can  go  with  you  no  farther.  What- 
ever you  may  say  about  infants,  for  one,  I  solemnly 
believe  that  God  views  and  treats  them,  in  all  respects, 
just  as  he  would  do  if  they  were  sinners.  To  say  that 
animals  die,  and  therefore  death  can  be  no  proof  of  sin, 
in  infants,  is,  to  take  infidel  ground.  The  infidel  has  just 
as  good  a  right  to  say, — Because  animals  die,  without 
being  sinners,  therefore  adults  may.  .  .  .  You  may 
speculate  better  than  I  can ;  but  I  know  one  thing, 
better  than  you  do.  I  know  better  what  Christians 
will,  and  wliat  they  will  not,  receive ;  and  I  forewarn 
you,  that,  whenever  you  come  out,  our  best  Christians 
will  revolt.  I  felt  a  deep  interest  in  the  controversy, 
between  the  Orthodox  and  the  Unitarians,  while  it  was 
kept  out  on  the  open  field  of  total  depravity,  regenera- 
tion by  the  Holy  Spirit,  divine  sovereignty,  and  election. 
For  this  was  taking  the  enemy  by  the  heart,  and  I  knew 


NEW    HAVEN   THEOLOGY.  187 

who  would  conquer.  But  you  are  giving  the  discussion 
a  bad  turn,  and  I  have  lost  all  my  interest  in  the  sub- 
ject, and  do  not  wish  my  fellow-sinners  to  hear  it/'* 

This  letter  of  warning  was  written  in  December, 
1821.  The  next  spring,  it  began  to  be  understood  that 
a  seminary  was  about  to  be  founded,  in  the  interest  of 
the  new  divinity.  At  the  meeting  of  the  Hartford 
North  Association,  the  Rev.  Dr.  N.  Perkins  "spoke  of 
Drs.  Taylor,  Beecher,  and  others,  as  associates  in  found- 
ing a  new  seminary ;  being  apprehensive  that  Andover 
might  not  be  what  they  desired  it  to  be."  Dr.  Perkins 
remarked,  with  some  emotion,  "  Dr.  Beecher  says, 
^  We,'  (meaning  Dr.  Beecher,  Taylor,  and  others,)  ^  We 
must  have  another  seminary ;  and  then,  if  we  lose  one, 
we  shall  have  one  left.'  Dr.  Perkins  said,  ^This  is 
good  logic,' — but,  like  all  other  men  who  had  seen 
Stuart's  letters  to  Channing,  or  Woods'  letters  to 
Unitarians, — he  did  not  seem  disposed  to  think,  that 
the  cause  of  orthodoxy  was,  at  that  time,  in  such  peril 
as  to  demand  another  seminary ;  and  appeared  to  sus- 
pect their  meaning  to  be, — ^  If  Andover  will  not  incul- 
ca  e  our  views,  we  must  have  a  seminary  that  will."'t 

In  the  summer  of  1822,  mainly  through  the  exertions 
of  Prof.  Goodrich,  measures  were  taken  to  enlarge  the 
theological  department  of  Yale  College,  upon  the  plan 
of  adding  one  professor  for  the  theological  class,  to  be 
assisted  by  the  other  professors,  then  existing.  An 
endowment  was  raised  for  the  chair  of  Didactic  Theol- 
ogy,— the  founders    requiring  the  Professor  to  sign  a 

■*  In  Letters  on  the  Origin  and  Progress  of  New  Haven  Theology, 
(anonymously,)  by  Dr.  Tyler,  1837,  p.  8. 
t  Letter  from  Eev.  J.  J.  Foot,  May  2,  1839,  in  Hewit  MS. 


188  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

declaration  tliat  "  I  hereby  declare  ray  free  assent  to 
the  Confession  of  Faith  and  Ecclesiastical  Discipline, 
agreed  upon  by  the  churches  of  this  State,  in  1708/^ — 
(that  is,  the  Saybrook  Platform.)  It  was  provided  that 
"If,  at  any  future  period,  any  person,  who  fills  the  chair 
of  this  Professorship,  holds  or  teaches  doctrines  contrary 
to  those  referred  to,  it  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  Corpora- 
tion of  the  college  to  dismiss  him  forthwith ;  and,  if 
they  do  not  dismiss  him,  then,  we  reserve  to  our  heirs 
the  right  to  demand  the  several  sums  which  we  have 
paid,  or  may,  hereafter,  pay  respectively/^ 

The  Corporation  made  record  of  this  requirement, 
and  voted  that  "  this  Board  doth,  accordingly,  found 
and  establish,  in  this  college,  on  said  fund,  a  professor- 
ship of  Didactic  Theology,  on  the  terms,  conditions, 
and  limitations  expressed  in  said  instrument."  Dr. 
Taylor  was  elected  to  the  newly-founded  chair,  signed 
the  required  declaration,  and  was  inducted  into  office. 
This  action  was  afterward  vindicated,  by  the  faculty  of 
the  college,  in  a  published  statement,  upon  the  ground 
that  the  subscription  required  at  Yale,  to  articles  of 
faith,  is  only  binding  "  for  substance  of  doctrine ;"  and 
that  Dr.  Taylor  "  had  certain  knowledge,  from  personal 
intercourse  with  the  founders  [of  that  professorsliip] 
that,  had  he  embraced  every  minute  doctrine  of  tlie 
Confession,  it  would  have  been  considered  a  decisive 
disqualification  for  the  office."  Was  it,  then,  the  design 
of  the  founders  to  mislead  the  public  ? 

For  some  time  after  the  organization  of  the  theologi- 
cal department,  the  professors  were  occupied  in  the 
quiet  propagation  of  their  sentiments,  through  tlie  in- 
struction of  their  classes,  without  any  public  demonelia- 


NEW   HAVEN   THEOLOGY.  189 

tion,  on  the  subject.  But,  soon,  the  students  of  the 
institution  began  to  issue  forth,  eager  to  disseminate  the 
new  discoveries  which  they  had  received.  Says  a  writer 
who,  in  March,  1826,  spent  tAvo  or  three  weeks  in  New 
Haven, — "  I  had  much  conversation  with  several  tlieo- 
logical  students,  and  some  interviews  with  tutor  Edward 
Beecher,  and  also  with  Professors  Gibbs  and  Fitch. 
Such  phrases  were  very  common,  as, — ^  Our  views,' 
'  New  divinity,'  ^  Dr.  Taylor's  views  ;'  and  there  seemed 
to  .be  a  general  opinion  that  New  Haven  had  made 
some  advances  in  theology."* 

At  this  time  the  Rev.  Eleazer  T.  Fitch  occupied  the 
chair  of  Divinity,  in  Yale  College.  It  was  one  of  the 
duties  of  his  office,  to  preach,  statedly,  in  the  college 
chapel,  to  the  students.  In  the  summer  of  this  year, 
he  preached,  on  one  Sabbath,  in  fulfillment  of  this  office, 
two  sermons,  on  the  nature  of  sin ;  which,  at  the  request 
of  the  theological  students,  were  published. f  In  these 
discourses,  the  Professor  undertook  to  establish  "  the 
unlimited  proposition,  that  sin,  in  every  form  and  in- 
stance, is  reducible  to  the  act  of  a  moral  agent,  in  which 
he  violates  a  known  rule  of  duty."  Having  endeavored 
to  establish  this  position,  he  hence  deduced,  among 
others,  the  following  conclusions.  "  2.  That  the  truth 
which  we  have  considered  shows  us  that  there  is  not  a 
sinful  heart  in  any  moral  agent,  distinct  fi^om  his  own 
sinful  choices^  determinations,  or  preferences^^  ^^I  have 
not  denied,"  says  the  preacher,  "and  do  not  deny,  that 
one  purpose,  choice,  or  preference  of  the  agent,  may 

*  Rev.  Jos.  J.  Foot,  in  Hewit  MS. 

t  Two  discourses  on  the  Nature  of  Sin,  delivered  before  the  students 
of  Yale  College,  July  30,  1826,  by  Eleazer  T.  Fitch,  8vo.,  pp.  46. 


190  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL 

have  influence  over  hira,  in  regard  to  another ;  but 
what  I  deny  is,  that  any  such  disposition,  itself  moral, 
which  is  supposed  to  influence  the  agent  to  a  given 
resolution,  is  itself,  in  its  origin  and  continuance, 
at   all   distinct   from  a  determination    of   will  in   the 


v 


agent. 

"3.  We  learn,  from  the  present  subject  that,  in  the 
connection  of  Adam  with  his  posterity,  no  sin  of  his  is 
reckoned  theirs." 

"4.  The  subject  may  assist  us  in  making  a  right 
explanation  of  original  sin.'^  The  explanation  however 
is  very  vague,  and  amounts  to  this, — that  "  the  Scrip- 
tures intend  not  to  teach,  that  men  are  individually  the 
subjects  of  sin,  by  imputation  of  guilt ;  or,  by  vltiosity 
of  constitution,  previous  to  moral  and  accountable  action, 
or  separate  from  such  action.  We  are  led,  therefore,  to 
the  conclusion  that,  although  man  may  be  so  affected, 
at  his  origin,  in  his  constitution,  as  to  render  certain  his 
commencing  moral  agency  in  sinful  action,  yet,  that 
nothing  can  with  truth  be  called  his  original  sin,  but 
his  first  moral  choice  or  preference  being  evil ;  which 
original  determination  of  will,  or  moral  purpose,  ope- 
rates, in  addition  to  his  original  susceptibilities,  as  a 
ground  of  his  succeeding  acts  being  sinful." 

These  discourses  excited  comparatively  little  atten- 
tion, in  New  England,  where  the  imputation  of  x4.dam's 
sin  had  been  almost  universally  repudiated,  from  the 
time  when  the  writings  of  Edwards  acquired  authority 
and  his  theory  of  identity  became  identified  with  the 
doctrine;  and  where  many  of  the  "orthodox"  held  the 
Hopkinsian  position,  that  all  sin  and  holiness  consist  in 
exercise,  or  action.     They  were  reviewed  by  the  Rev. 


K^EW   HAVEN   THEOLOGY.  191 

Dr.  Ashbel  Green,  in  the  Christian  Advocate;*  to  whom 
the  Professor  replied,  in  a  pamphlet  of  ninety-five  pages, 
characterized  by  an  extraordinary  display  of  arrogance 
and  hauteiir.f  He  scouts  the  absurdity  "  of  carrying 
our  views  of  guilt  beyond  the  voluntary  agency  of  man, 
to  (we  know  not  what,)  the  nature  of  man,  the  seat  of 
the  affections."  A  self-determining  power  of  the  will, — 
a  power  in  the  sinner  to  make  him  a  new  heart, — is 
also  urged  with  great  emphasis,  (although  not  directly 
asserted ;)  by  holding  up  to  scorn  the  opposite  doctrine. 
"  Will  he," — the  preacher  on  that  text, — "  say,  ^  You 
know, — and  the  King  knoweth,  that  none  ever  do  make 
them  new  hearts?^  AYhere  is  his  warrant  for  this? 
Who  has  told  him,  that  men  cannot  and  do  not  ^  work 
out  their  own  salvation,^  when  the  Spirit  of  God  is 
influencing  them  to  will  and  to  do  ?" 

At  the  commencement  of  Yale  College,  in  1828,  Dr. 
Taylor  preached  the  "  Concio  ad  Clerum,"!  in  the  col- 
lege chapel,  to  a  large  assembly  of  the  clergy  of  Con- 
necticut. The  text  was  from  Eph.  ii.  3.  "  And  were, 
bv  nature,  children  of  wrath."  The  doctrine  announced 
was,  "  that  the  entire  moral  depravity  of  mankind  is  by 
nature."  From  this  good  beginning,  the  professor  pro- 
ceeded to  develop  a  doctrine  essentially  identical  with  that 
set  forth  in  Fitch's  discourses.  He  defined  moral  de- 
pravity as,  in  general,  the  entire  sinfulness  of  man's  moral 
character, — that  state  of  the  mind  and  heart  to  which 
guilt  and  the  desert  of  wrath  pertain.  This,  he  says, 
^^  does  not  consist  in  any  essential  attribute  or  property 

*  Christian  Advocate,  1826,  pp.  136,  162. 

f  An  Inquiry  into  the  Nature  of  Sin.     New  Haven,  1827. 

X  The  charge  to  the  clergy. 


192  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

of  the  soul, — not  in  anything  created  in  man  by  his 
Maker.''  "Nor  does  it  consist  in  a  sinful  nature,  which 
they  have  corrupted,  by  being  07ie  with  Adam,  and 
acting  in  his  actJ^  Nor  ''  in  any  constitutional  propensi- 
ties of  their  nature.''  "  Nor  does  any  degree  of  excite- 
ment of  these  propensities  or  desires,  not  resulting  in 
choice,  constitute  moral  depravity."  "  Nor  does  the 
moral  depravity  of  men  consist  in  any  disposition  or 
tendency  to  sin,  which  is  the  cause  of  all  sin." 

In  what  then  does  it  consist?  "  I  answer,  it  is  man's 
own  act,  consisting  in  a  free  choice  of  some  object,  rather 
than  G-od,  as  his  chief  good  ;  or  a  free  preference  of  the 
world  and  of  worldly  good,  to  the  will  and  glory  of  God." 
In  support  of  this  statement,  he  pretends  to  appeal  to 
Calvin,  Bellamy,  Edwards,  and  the  Westminister  As- 
sembly, itself!  "The  Westminister  divines  say  that 
'every  sin,  both  original  and  actual,  being  a  transgression 
of  the  righteous  law  of  God,'  etc.  I  ask.  Is  not  trans- 
gression action  ?  Is  it  not  something  done,  and  done 
knowingly  and  voluntarily  ?" 

The  second  head  of  the  discourse  is,  "  that  this 
depravity  is  by  nature."  What  does  this  mean ?  "I 
answer,  that  such  is  their  nature,  that  they  will  sin  and 
only  sin,  in  all  the  appropriate  circumstances  of  their 
being."  "  When  I  say  that  mankind  are  entirely  de- 
praved by  nature,  I  do  not  mean  that  their  nature  is  itself 
sinful,  nor  that  their  nature  is  the  physical  or  efficient 
cause  of  their  sinning ;  but  I  mean  that  their  nature  is 
the  occasion,  or  reason  of  their  sinning;  that  such  is 
their  nature,  that,  in  all  the  appropriate  circumstances 
of  tlieir  being,  they  will  sin  and  only  sin." 

The  discourse  closes  with  two  or  three  "remarks." 


NEW    HAVEN   THEOLOGY.  193 

^'  1.  It  is  consistent  with  the  doctrine  of  this  discourse, 
that  infants  should  be  saved  through  the  redemption  of 
Christ.  They  belong  to  a  race  who,  by  nature,  and  in 
all  the  appropriate  circumstances  of  their  being,  will  sin. 
.  .  .  Do  you  ask  when  he  will  begin  to  sin  ?  I  answer, 
I  do  not  know  the  precise  instant.  The  Scriptures  do 
not  tell  us, — and  I  can  see  no  possible  use  in  saying 
that  we  do  know,  what  it  is  most  palpably  evident  we 
do  not  know.  Is  it  then  said,  that  we  sin  before  we  are 
born  ?  But  there  is  no  such  thing  as  sinning  without 
acting;  and  an  apostle  has  told  us  of  two  infants, 
who,  while  ^not  yet  born,'  had  done  *  neither  good 
nor  evil.' " 

Another  "  remark,'^  whilst  carefully  avoiding  any  ex- 
press assertion  of  the  self-determining  power  of  the  will, 
and  the  ability  of  the  sinner  to  make  himself  a  new 
heart,  very  earnestly  intimates  that  doctrine  to  be  true, 
and  urges  precisely  the  same  arguments  which  had  been 
employed  before,  by  Professor  Fitch;  of  Avhose  dis- 
courses, the  Concio  ad  Clerum  "was  a  more  elaborate 
reproduction. 

One  new  point,  however,  was  now  introduced  into  the 
controversy.  The  Professor  challenged  proof  that  God 
could  have  adopted  a  moral  system,  and  prevented  all  sin. 
'^  Do  you  say,  that  God  gave  man  a  nature,  which  he 
knew  ^vould  lead  him  to  sin  ?  What  if  he  did  ?  Do 
you  know  that  God  could  have  done  better, — better,  on 
the  whole;  or,  better,  if  he  gave  him  existence  at  all, 
even  for  the  individual  himself?  The  error  lies  in  the 
gratuitous  assumption,  that  God  could  have  adopted  a 
moral  system,  and  prevented  all  sin,  or  at  least,  the 
present  degree  of  sin.  For  no  man  knows  this ;  no 
IT 


194  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

man  can  prove  it.  ...  I  say  then,  that,  as  ignorance  is 
incom]3etent  to  make  an  objection,  and  as  no  one  knows 
that  this  supposition  is  not  a  matter  of  fact,  no  one  has 
a  right  to  assert  the  contrary,  or  even  to  think  it." 

In  a  long  marginal  note,  he  assails  two  "  common 
but  groundless  assumptions  :" — '^  First.  That  sin  is  the 
necessary  means  of  the  greatest  good,  and,  as  such,  so 
far  as  it  exists,  is  preferable,  on  tlie  whole,  to  holiness 
in  its  stead.  Secondly,  That  God  could,  in  a  moral 
system,  have  prevented  all  sin ;  or,  at  least,  the  present 
degree  of  sin."  In  opposition  to  the  latter  dogma,  he 
says, — '^  If  holiness,  in  a  moral  system,  be  preferable, 
on  the  whole,  to  sin,  in  its  stead,  why  did  not  a  benevo- 
lent God,  were  it  possible  to  him,  prevent  all  sin,  and 
secure  the  prevalence  of  universal  holiness  ?  Would 
not  a  moral  universe  of  perfect  holiness,  and  of  course, 
of  perfect  happiness,  be  happier  and  better  than  one 
comprising  sin  and  its  miseries  ?  And  must  not  infinite 
benevolence  accomplish  all  the  good  it  can  ?  Would 
not  a  benevolent  God,  then,  Jiad  it  been  possible  to  him, 
in  the  nature  of  things,  have  secured  the  existence  of 
universal  holiness  in  his  moral  kingdom  ?  ...  Is  there, 
then,  the  least  particle  of  evidence  that  the  entire  pre- 
vention of  sin,  in  moral  beings,  is  possible  to  God,  in 
the  nature  of  things  ?  If  not,  then,  what  becomes  of 
the  very  common  assumption  of  such  possibility?" 

The  Concio  ad  Clerum  was  ably  reviewed  by  the 
Kev.  Dr.  Harvey,*  to  whom  a  reply  was  published,  in 
the   Christian   Spectator,   from   the   pen   of   Professor 

*  A  Review  of  a  Sermon  Delivered  in  the  chapel  of  Yale  College, 
Sept.  10,  1828,  by  Nathaniel  W.  Taylor,  D.D.,  by  Joseph  Harvey. 
Svo.  pp.  40.  / 


NEW   HAVEN   THEOLOGY.  195 

Goodrich  ;  who  incorporated  therein  the  substance  of  liis 
own  lecture  of  1821. 

In  the  course  of  the  year  1829,  the  successive  num- 
bers of  the  Christian  Spectator  contained  a  series  of 
articles,  from  Dr.  Taylor,  on  regeneration.  Taking  occa- 
sion from  a  recently  published  treatise  on  the  means 
of  regeneration,  by  Dr.  Sj^ring,  of  New  York,*  which 
was  briefly  noticed,  in  the  first  article,  the  professor 
proceeded  to  develop  fully  and  boldly  the  views,  on 
that  and  the  connected  subjects,  which  had  only  been 
implied  or  cautiously  suggested,  in  the  previous  disclo- 
sures, from  New  Haven. 

These  articles  completed  the  development  of  the 
essential  features  of  the  New  Haven  system.  The 
writer  undertakes  to  analyze  regeneration,  and  show 
what  it  is,  and  what  the  means  by  which  it  is  accom- 
plished. The  definition,  and  the  process  indicated, 
alike  ignore  the  scriptural  doctrine  of  regeneration,  and 
exclude  it.  There  is,  in  the  scheme,  no  room,  and  no 
occasion,  for  the  renewing  of  the  Holy  Ghost, — the  new 
creation  of  the  elect  in  Christ  Jesus. 

"  Regeneration,  considered  as  a  moral  change,  of 
which  man  is  the  subject, — giving  God  the  heart, — 
making  a  new  heart, — loving  God  supremely,  etc.,  are 
terms  and  phrases  which,  in  popular  use,  denote  a  com- 
plex act.  Each,  in  popular  use,  denotes  what,  in  a 
more  analytical  mode  of  speaking,  may  be  viewed  and 
described,  as  made  up  of  several  particular  acts  and 
states  of  mind ;  or,  as  a  series  of  such  acts  and  states ; 
which  are,  yet,  so  related  and  connected,  that,  for  all 

*  A  Dissertation  on  the  Means  of  Eegeneration,  by  Gardiner  Spring, 
New  York,  1827.  pp.  50. 


196  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

ordinary  purposes,  they  are  sufficiently  defined  when 
spoken  of  in  combination,  and  as  constituting  one  act, 
undei-  one  name.  Indeed,  it  is  of  this  combination  or 
series  of  mental  acts,  only,  that  moral  quality  can  be 
predicated ;  since  no  one  act  of  the  process,  viewed  ab- 
stractly from  the  other  acts,  can  be  a  moral  act.  The 
act  of  the  will,  or  heart,  viewed  abstractly  from  the 
acts  of  the  intellect,  is  not  moral ;  nor  are  the  acts  of 
the  intellect,  viewed  abstractly  from  the  will  or  heart."* 

"  When  we  sj^eak  of  the  means  of  regeneration,  we 
shall  use  the  word,  regeneration,  in  a  more  limited  im- 
port than  its  ordinary  popular  import ;  and  shall  confine 
it,  chiefly  for  the  sake  of  convenient  phraseology,  to  the 
act  of  the  will  or  heart,  in  distinction  from  other  mental 
acts,  connected  with  it ;  or,  to  that  act  of  the  will  or  heart, 
which  consists  in  a  preference  of  God  to  every  other  object; 
or,  to  that  disposition  of  the  heart,  or  governing  affec- 
tion or  purpose  of  the  man,  which  consecrates  him  to  the 
service  and  glory  of  God.^f  It  is  ^^  that  ultimate  act 
of  the  will,  in  which  the  soul,  under  the  influence  of 
the  Holy  Spirit,  chooses  God,  as  its  supreme  good."| 

'^  We  affirm  that  there  are  certain  mental  acts  and 
states,  which,  in  the  order  of  nature,  at  least,  precede 
regeneration ;  or  which  precede, — as  we  propose  to  use 
the  term,  regeneration, — that  act  of  the  will  or  heart, 
in  which  God  is  preferred  to  every  other  object.  Of 
these  mental  acts  and  states,  our  object  does  not  require 
that  we  give  an  accurate  analysis.  It  is  sufficient  for 
our  purpose,  to  show  that  there  are  such  acts  and  states, 
and  that  we  so  far  describe  them,  that  it  may  be  under- 

*  Christian  Spectator,  1829,  p.  16. 

t  Ibid.,  p.  18.  %  Ibid.,  p.  210. 


KEW   HAVEN   THEOLOGY.  197 

stood,  what  class  of  mental  acts  we  designate,  as  prelimi- 
nary to  regeneration,  and  as  constituting  usin^-  the  means 
of  regeneration.  We  proceed  then  to  say,  that  before 
the  act  of  will,  or  heart,  in  which  the  sinner  first  pre- 
fers God  to  every  other  object,  the  object  of  the  prefer- 
ence must  be  viewed  or  estimated  as  the  greatest  good. 
Before  the  object  can  be  viewed  as  the. greatest  good,  it 
must  be  compared  with  other  objects ;  as  both  are 
sources  or  means  of  good.  Before  this  act  of  compar- 
ing, there  must  be  an  act  dictated,  not  by  selfishness, 
but  by  self-love ;  in  which  the  mind  determines  to 
direct  its  thoughts  to  the  objects,  for  the  sake  of  con- 
sidering their  relative  value,  of  forming  a  judgment 
respecting  it,  and  of  choosing  one  or  the  other  as  the 
chief  good.  These  acts,  also,  imply,  under  the  presen- 
tation of  the  objects  to  the  mind,  an  intellectual  per- 
ception of  their  adaptedness  to  the  nature  of  man,  as 
sources  or  means  of  happiness ;  and,  also,  an  excite- 
ment of  constitutional  susceptibilities,  in  view  of  the 
objects ;  i.  e.,  involuntary  propensitits,  inclinations,  or 
desires,  toward  each  object  respectively.'^* 

"  Divine  truth  does  not  become  a  means  to  this  end, 
until  the  selfish  principle,  so  long  cherished  in  the 
heart,  is  suspended,  and  the  mind  is  left  to  the  control 
of  that  constitutional  desire  for  happiness  which  is  an 
original  principle  of  our  nature.  Then  it  i^,  we  appre- 
hend, that  God  and  the  world  are  contemplated  by  the 
mind  as  objects  of  choice,  substantially  as  they  would 
be  by  a  being  who  had  just  entered  on  existence,  and 
who  w^as  called  upon,  for  the  first  time,  to  select  the 
one  or  the  other,  as  his  supreme  good.'^f 

*  Christian  Spectator,  1829,  p.  19.  .    f  Ibid.,  p.  210. 

17* 


198  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

"  The  sinner  is  the  subject  of  that  constitutional  de- 
sire of  happiness,  called  self-love ;  to  which  no  moral 
quality  pertains.  Let  the  sinner,  then,  as  a  being  who 
loves  happiness  and  desires  the  highest  degree  of  it, 
under  the  influence  of  such  a  desire,  take  into  solemn 
consideration  the  question,  whether  the  highest  happi- 
ness is  to  be  found  in  God,  or,  in  the  world ;  let  him 
pursue  the  inquiry,  if  need  be,  till  it  result  in  the  convic- 
tion that  such  happiness  is  to  be  found  in  God  only ; — 
and  let  him  follow  up  this  conviction,  with  that  intent 
and  engrossing  contemplation  of  the  realities  which 
truth  discloses,  and  with  that  stirring  up  of  his  sensi- 
bilities, in  view  of  them,  which  shall  invest  the  world, 
when  considered  as  his  only  portion,  with  an  aspect 
of  insignificance,  of  gloom,  and  even  of  terror,  and 
which  shall  chill  and  suspend  his  present  active  love 
of  it ;  and  let  the  contemplation  be  persevered  in,  till 
it  shall  discover  a  reality  and  an  excellence  in  the 
objects  of  holy  affections,  which  shall  put  him  upon 
direct  and  desperate  efforts  to  fix  his  heart  upon  them ; 
and  let  this  process  of  thought,  of  effort,  and  of  action, 
be  entered  upon  as  one  which  is  never  to  be  abandoned, 
until  the  end  proposed  by  it  is  accomplished ;  until  the 
only  living  and  true  God  is  loved  and  chosen,  as  his 
God  for  ever ;  and  we  say,  that  in  this  way,  the  work 
of  regeneration,  through  grace,  may  be  accomplished."* 

Such  is  the  plan  devised  at  New  Haven  to  make  re- 
generation so  easy  that  men  may  not  be  discouraged 
from  attempting  to  do  it.  It  has  one  defect.  We  are 
not  told  how  to  get  rid  of  selfishness ;  which  is  the  first 
and  essential  step  in  the  whole  case.  Further,  it  will 
*  Christian  Spectator,  1S29,  p.  32. 


NEW   HAVEN   THEOLOGY.  199 

be  remembered  that  "  all  sin  is  selfishness  ;^'  and,  accord- 
ing to  this  New  Haven  means  of  regeneration,  self-love, 
which  is  to  be  the  motive  power,  in  the  process  de- 
scribed, has  no  moral  quality;  nor  have  any  of  the 
series  of  acts  enumerated,  abstractly  from  the  final  act 
of  the  will,  by  which,  as  a  result  of  the  whole  process, 
God  is  chosen.  In  the  mean  time,  is  the  man  in  a  neu- 
tral state,  neither  sinful  nor  holy? 

Surely  there  is  a  better  way  than  this.  There  are 
those  who  "  were  born,  not  of  blood,  nor  of  the  will  of 
the  flesh,  nor  of  the  ivlll  of  man,  but  of  God." 

Dr.  Taylor's  closing  number  was  a  designed  modifi- 
cation of  the  previous  ones ;  partly,  at  the  suggestion 
of  Dr.  Beecher.  The  latter  told  him  that  he  had  em- 
ployed terms  badly,  in  speaking  of  the  "  suspension  of 
selfishness."  "  All  that  Dr.  Taylor  means,"  said  he,  to 
Dr.  Porter  of  Andover,  is,  that  "the  carnal  mind  is 
held  in  check,  or  does  not  act,  and  not  that  it  is  extinct." 
"  While  this  carnal  mind  is  thus  checked,  has  it  moral 
qualities  ?"  said  Dr.  Porter.  "  Doubtless,"  he  replied. 
"  Is  it  sinful,  or  holy,  or  neither?"  (Pause.)  "The  man 
is  doubtless  a  sinner  "  said  he.  "  Can  one  who  pugna^  ^ 
ciously  and  ostentatiously  maintains  that  all  sin  consists 
in  action,  maintain  that  a  carnal  mind  is  sinful,  when 
its  action  has  ceased?"     (No  reply.)* 

While  the  articles  on  regeneration  were  publishing,  a 
conference  was  held,  at  Andover,  at  the  house  of  Dr. 
Porter,  with  a  view  to  see  whether  mutual  explanations 
might  not  result  in  a  restoration  of  confidence.  There 
were  present,  the  Andover  professors.  Professors  Taylor 
and  Goodrich,  Drs.  Beecher,  Church,  Spring,  Cogswell, 
*  Dr.  Porter,  of  Andover ;  in  Tyler's  Letters,  p.  23. 


200  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

He  wit,  Mr.  Nettleton  and  others.  The  explanations 
given,  by  the  New  Haven  professors,  however,  only 
served  to  increase  the  anxiety.  In  the  course  of  the 
interview,  Dr.  Woods  said  to  Dr.  Taylor,  "  Does  the 
infant  need  regenerating  grace,  in  the  first  month  of  its 
existence  f  Dr.  Taylor  replied,  "  No."  "  Does  he 
need  this  grace  in  the  second  month  ?"  Again,  he  an- 
swered, '^  No."  "  Does  he  need  it  in  the  third  month?" 
He  replied  as  before.  Dr.  Woods  pursued  his  inquiry, 
to  the  fourth,  the  fifth  or  sixth  month  of  the  child's 
age ;  and  at  one  of  these  points.  Dr.  Taylor  said,  "  I 
don't  know  but  that  the  child  may  then  need  renewing 
grace."* 

^  Letter  from   Kev.  Dr.   John  H.   Churcli,   April  30,   1839,   in 
Hewit  MS. 


CHAPTER    XIll. 

THE  CONTROVEESY  IN  NEW  ENGLAND. 

The  Ha wes_^ correspondence — Beeclier's  letters — He  was  identified 
with  Taylor — East  Windsor  Seminary — Dow's  report  on  Taylor's 
theology — Statement  of  the  Pi-oiessors — Distinction  of  Primary 
and  Secondary  doctrines — "The  system"  and  the  surplusage — 
Theology  of  Dr.  Woods  of  Andover — The  Andover  Professors 
subscribe  the  Catechism — Stuart  and  Park — Tendency  to  Univer- 
salism — General  tendency  in  New  England  to  defection — Its  cause 
— New  divinity  and  vital  religion — Taylor  and  Beech  er,  and 
Nettleton. 

The  "  Hawes  correspondence'^  appeared,  in  the  Con- 
necticut Observer,  of  February  20,  1832.  In  this  cor- 
respondence, Dr.  Hawes,  of  Hartford,  in  a  letter  to  Dr. 
Taylor,  enumerates  some  leading  doctrines  of  theology, 
and  informs  him,  that  "  there  are  not  a  few  in  the 
community  who,  from  some  cause  or  other,  are  appre- 
hensive that  you  are  not  sound  on  those  doctrines,  and 
much  alarm  has  been  expressed,  lest,  as  a  teacher  of 
theology,  you  should  introduce  heresy  into  our  churches. '' 
He  therefore  tells  him,  ^'  I  cannot  but  feel  that  you  owe 
it  to  yourself,  to  the  institution  with  which  you  are 
connected,  and  to  the  Christian  community  in  general, 
to  make  a  frank  and  full  statement  of  your  views  of 
the  doctrines  above  mentioned;"  and  calls  on  him  for 

201 


202  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

"  a  clear  and  full  expression"  of  his  sentiments  on  tliese 
subjects. 

Dr.  Taylor,  in  reply,  acknowledges,  that  "  an  impres- 
sion has  been  made,  to  some  extent,  that  I  am  unsound 
in  the  faith.  This  impression,  I  feel  bound  to  say,  in 
my  own  view,  is  Avholly  groundless  and  unauthorized." 
He  appeals  to  ^^  the  repeated  and  full  statements"  of  his 
opinions,  already  before  the  public,  as  "  sufficient  to 
prevent  or  remove  such  suspicions.  The  course  you 
propose,  however,  may  furnish  information  to  some, 
who  may  desire  it  before  they  form  an  opinion,  as  well 
as  the  means  of  correcting  the  misrepresentations  of 
others.  I,  therefore,  readily  comply  with  your  request, 
and  submit  to  your  disposal  the  following  statement  of 
my  belief,  on  some  of  the  leading  doctrines  of  the 
gospel."  He  then  proceeds  to  give  his  creed,  on  the 
controverted  points,  in  eleven  articles,  couched  in  lan- 
guage which  would  indicate  but  slight  deviation  from 
the  theology  of  the  orthodox  ministry  of  New  England. 
But,  to  these  articles  were  added  certain  explanatory 
statements,  which  left  no  room  to  doubt,  that  the  ortho- 
dox language  of  the  articles  was  employed  in  an  alto- 
gether different  sense  from  that  in  common  use.*  It 
further  transpired  that,  as  at  first  communicated.  Dr. 
Taylor's  letter  contained  some  things  which  Dr.  Hawes 
thought  unfit  for  publication ;  and  that  he  had  obtained 
Dr.  Taylor's  permission,  and  altered  the  paper,  with  his 
own  hand,  thus  omitting  the  most  "  frank  and  full" 
statements  in  the  whole  paper.      The  conclusion  was 

*  Dr.  Taylor's  letter  appears  in  the  Christian  Spectator  for  March, 
1832,  p.  171. 


THE   COXTROVEllSY   IN    NEW    ENGLAND.  203 

inevitable,  that  the  correspondence  was  a  device  to  hood- 
wink the  public. 

In  1833,  another  effort  to  qniet  apprehension,  was 
made  by  Dr.  Beechcr,  who,  addressing  himself  in  a 
series  of  letters  to  Dr.  Woods  of  Andover,  undertook  to 
show,  among  other  things,  that  in  New  England, 
"  there  are,  among  evangelical  men  no  differences  in 
principle,  upon  any  fundamental  point ;  and  no  shades 
of  differences  which  do  not  admit  of  an  easy  and  peace- 
ful comprehension  within  the  acknowledged  limits  of 
sound  orthodoxy.'^  He  stated  himself  to  have  had 
^'  the  deliberate  opinion,  for  many  years,  derived  from 
extensive  observation,  and  careful  attention  to  the 
elementary  principles  of  the  various  differences  which 
have  agitated  the  Church,  that  the  ministers  of  the 
orthodox  Congregational  Church,  and  the  ministers  of 
the  Presbyterian  Church,  are  all  cordially  united  in 
everv  one  of  the  doctrines  of  the  Bible,  and  of  the 
Confessions  of  Faith,  which  have  been  regarded  and 
denominated  fundamental.'^ 

It  was.  in  fact,  a  matter  of  no  little  importance  to 
this  ingenious  and  eccentric  divine,  to  be  able  to  estab- 
lish the  position  thus  so  confidently  stated.  His  rela- 
tion to  the  publication  and  defence  of  the  New  Haven 
speculations,  was  most  intimate  and  responsible. 

Dr.  Taylor  was  in  the  habit  of  submitting  his  contro- 
versial pieces  to  the  revision  of  Dr.  Beecher,  before 
publication.  "  This  was  the  fact,  in  regard  to  the  review 
of  Dr.  Tyler's  remarks,  published  in  the  Christian 
Spectator,  for  September,  1832,"* — one  of  the  most  ex- 
ceptionable productions  of  the  author's  p^n;  in  which 

*  Tyler's  Letters,  p.  94. 


204  HISTOEY   OF   THE    NEAY   SCHOOL. 

be  misrepresents  and  denounces  the  doctrines  of  a  real 
corruption  of  the  nature  of  man,  incurred  in  the  fall ; 
of  the  possibility  that  God  could  have  prevented  sin 
in  tlie  universe ;  and  of  the  necessity  of  the  immediate 
transforming  agency  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  in  regeneration. 
It  was  true,  in  regard  to  Dr.  Taylor's  communications 
for  the  Spirit  of  the  Pilgrims,  in  his  controversy  with 
Dr.  Tyler ;  in  which  all  the  peculiarities  of  the  New 
Heaven  system  were  brought  under  discussion.  In  one 
instance.  Dr.  Beecher  took  so  much  liberty  with  a  com- 
munication, that  Dr.  Taylor,  in  a  subsequent  number, 
had  occasion  to  make  the  following  remark  : — ^'Here  I 
shall  first  advert  to  an  error  in  phraseology,  which, 
though  not  my  own,  occurred  in  some  instances,  in  my 
reply  to  Dr.  Tyler's  Remarks.  This  arose  from  the  inser- 
tion of  a  passage,  while  my  reply  was  passing  through  the 
press,  by  one  of  the  conductors  of  the  Spirit  of  the  Pil- 
grims. For  the  liberty  thus  taken,  I  am  not  disposed 
to  censure  my  friend,  considering  our  long  intimacy,  and 
the  coincidence  of  our  views  on  theological  subjects,  and 
the  desire  from  which  it  sprung  of  giving  an  additional 
illustration  of  my  opinions.'^  That  Dr.  Beecher  was  the 
^^  friend"  here  referred  to,  w^as  well  understood,  and  it  will 
be  perceived  that  Dr.  Taylor,  here,  in  this  public  manner, 
claims  a  "  coincidence  of  views'^  wdth  Dr.  Beecher,  on 
theological  subjects.  This  was  published,  under  Dr. 
Beecher's  own  eye,  in  a  periodical  of  which  he  was  one 
of  the  conductors ;  and  was  suffered  to  pass  Avithout 
contradiction. 

The  line  of  argument  adopted  by  Dr.  Beecher,  in  his 
attempt  to  harmonize  differences,  and  of  the  various 
publications   from  the  pens  of  Drs.  Harvey,  AVoods, 


THE  CONTROVERSY  IN  NEW  ENGLAND.    205 

Tyler,  Rand,  etc.,  in  opposition  to  tlie  teachings  of  New 
Haven,  we  do  not  propose  to  examine. 

In  1833,  at  a  convention  of  the  ministers  of  Connec- 
ticut, who  were  opposed  to  the  New  Haven  system,  the 
Pastoral  Union  was  formed,  on  the  basis  of  agreement 
in  the  articles  of  a  creed  which  was  framed  for  the  occa- 
sion. By  this  Union,  the  East  Windsor  Theological 
Institute  was  founded,  as  a  barrier  against  the  progress 
of  error.  How  inadequate  for  the  purpose,  this  organi- 
zation and  seminary,  a  glance  at  some  of  the  articles  of 
its  creed  will  evince.  This  was  neither  the  Westmin- 
ster Confession,  nor  the  Savoy,  the  Shorter  Catechism, 
nor  any  of  the  received  Confessions  of  the  Reformed 
Churches ;  but  an  original  paper,  of  which  the  following 
articles  indicate  the  most  important  positions  : 

"  9.  That  Adam,  the  federal  head  and  representative 
of  the  human  race,  was  placed  in  probation ;  that  he 
disobeyed  the  divine  command,  fell  from  holiness,  and 
involved  himself  and  all  his  posterity  in  depravity  and 
ruin.  And  that,  from  the  commencement  of  existence, 
every  man  is  personally  depraved,  destitute  of  holiness, 
unlike  and  opposed  to  God ;  and  that,  previously  to  his 
renewal  by  the  Holy  Spirit,  all  his  moral  actions  are 
adverse  to  the  character  and  glory  of  God ;  and  that, 
having  the  carnal  mind,  which  is  enmity  against  God, 
he  is,  justly,  exposed  to  all  the  miseries  of  this  life,  and 
to  eternal  damnation. 

"  10.  That  sin  consists  in  the  moral  corruption  of  the 
heart,  the  perverseness  of  the  will,  and  actual  trans- 
gressions of  the  divine  law. 

"  12.  That  the  only  Redeemer  of  the  elect,  is  the 
Lord  Jesus  Christ,  who  being  God,  became  man,  and 

18 


206  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

continues  to  be  God  and  man,  in  two  distinct  natures 
and  one  person  for  ever. 

"  13.  That,  except  a  man  be  born  again,  he  cannot 
see  the  kingdom  of  God ;  that  repentance,  faith  and 
holiness  are  the  personal  requisites  of  salvation,  in  the 
gospel  scheme ;  that  the  righteousness  of  Christ  is  the 
only  ground  of  the  sinner's  justification ;  that  this 
righteousness  is  received  by  faith,  and  that  this  faith  is 
the  gift  of  God:  so  that  our  salvation  is  wholly  of 
grace ;  that  no  means  whatever  can  change  the  heart  of 
the  sinner  and  make  it  holy;  that  regeneration  and 
sanctification  are  the  effects  of  the  creating  and  renew- 
ing agency  of  the  Holy  Spirit ;  and  that  supreme  love 
to  God  constitutes  the  essential  difference  between  saints 
and  sinners. 

"  14.  That  the  atonement  made  by  Christ,  in  his  obe- 
dience and  death,  is  the  only  ground  of  pardon  and  sal- 
vation to  sinners ;  and  that  this  ground  is  sufficently 
broad  for  the  offer  of  pardon  to  be  sincerely  made  to  all 
men." 

It  was  a  common  remark  among  the  disciples  of  the 
New  Divinity,  that  the  Confession  of  Faith  contained, 
indeed,  the  system  of  doctrines  taught  in  the  Holy 
Scriptures ;  but  that  it  also  contained  much  besides. 
An  examination  of  this  standard,  erected  by  the  sound- 
est divines  of  New  England,  against  the  errors  of  New 
Haven,  may  illustrate  the  significance  of  the  expres- 
sion ;  which  is  a  key  to  the  principle  on  which  that 
Confession  was  adopted  so  readily,  by  every  class  of 
New  England  theologians,  in  entering  our  Church. 
The  doctrine  of  original  sin, — "  the  guilt  of  Adam's  first 
sin,  the  want  of  original  righteousness,  and  the  corrup- 


THE   CONTROYEESY   IX    NEW   ENGLAND.  207 

tlon  of  man's  whole  naturey^ — tlie  " sin  in  Adam  and 
fall  with  him/'  is  utterly  obscured.  The  only  differ- 
ence between  New  Haven  and  East  Windsor  on  this 
point,  isj  that  the  latter  dates  depravity  from  the  com- 
mencement of  existence,  the  other  from  the  beginning 
of  moral  agency.  The  eternal  Sonship  of  Christ  is 
ignored, — a  doctrine  fundamental  to  his  divinity  and  to 
the  Godhead.  The  vicarious  atonement  of  the  Media- 
tor, his  satisfaction  to  justice,  and  justification  through 
his  imputed  righteousness,^all,  are  either  ignored,  or 
so  veiled  in  vague  expressions  tliat  the  New  Haven 
professors  would  have  found  no  great  difficulty  in  sub- 
scribing. The  good  intention  of  the  articles  is  neutral- 
ized by  their  sinister  ambiguity: 

It  is  not,  therefore,  strange  that  East  Windsor  has 
accomplished,  compai^atively,  little,  in  staying  the  tide 
of  error,  and  re-establishing  the  churches  in  their  an- 
cient faith.  • 

A  few  months  after  the  organization  of  East  Wind- 
sor, the  Kev.  Daniel  Dow,  one  of  the  Corporation  of 
Yale,  being  on  a  committee  to  attend  the  examination 
of  the  theological  department  of  that  institution,  stated 
in  his  report,  that,  in  his  view,  there  had  been  a  de- 
parture from  the  doctrines  on  which  the  institution  was 
founded,  in  the  instructions  given.  He  specified  the 
Dwight  Professor  of  Didactic  Theology,  (Dr.  Taylor,) 
as  having  published  doctrines  contrary  to  the  creed 
required  of  that  professor.  Upon  this  report,  the  Cor- 
poration took  no  action ;  but  appointed  a  committee  to 
"  inquire  into  the  usages  of  the  institution,  respecting 
assent  to  articles  of  faith ;"  and  invited  the  professors  to 
a  conference  with  the  Board,  on  the  subject.     The  result 


208  HISTORY    OF    THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

was  a  '^  Statement'^  from  the  professors,  with  the  pub- 
lishing of  ^^hich  the  Corporation  terminated  its  action 
in  the  matter.  From  this  statement,  it  appeared,  that, 
since  1722,  all  the  officers  of  Yale  College  had  been 
required  to  declare  their  assent  to  the  Savoy  Confession. 
This  assent  was  further  accompanied  with  an  exposition 
of  their  views,  in  detail ;  designed  to  ascertain  that 
their  adoption  really  meant  what  it  purported  to  be. 
In  1753,  ^Svhen  a  controversy  respecting  ^  Xew  Divin- 
ity,' arose,  a  stricter  assent  was  exacted,  as  a  safeguard 
against  apprehended  errors.  Not  only  the  officers,  but 
tlie  trustees  of  the  college  were  required  to  make  a  de- 
claration of  their  belief  in  the  Assembly's  Catechism 
and  Confession  of  Faith,  not  for  substance  of  doctrine, 
merely,  but  for  all  the  sentiments  therein  contained, 
and  to  renounce  all  doctrines,  or  principles,  contrary 
thereto." 

Upon  the  election  of  Dr.  Styles  to  the  ]3residency  of 
the  college,  in  1778,  he  objected  to  the  strict  rule  thus 
ado^^ted,  which  had  continued,  until  then,  in  full  force. 
In  a  conference  with  the  Corporation,  he  stated  his  diffi- 
culties, and  a  compromise  was  effected,  the  president 
subscribing  the  following  declaration : — ^^  I  do,  hereby 
give  my  assent  to  the  Confession  of  Faith,  and  rules 
of  ecclesiastical  discijdine,  agreed  upon  by  the  churches 
of  this  State  in  1708."  The  professors  hence  argue, 
that  the  subscription,  thus  established,  was  only  for  sub- 
stance of  doctrine. 

It  further  appeared,  from  this  statement,  that,  when 
Dr.  Taylor  was  inaugurated,  he,  in  signing  the  pledge 
required  by  the  founders  of  the  chair,  communicated  to 
the  Corporation,  an  additional  creed,  expository  of  his 


THE  CONTROVERSY  IN  NEW  ENGLAND.    209 

faith.  "This  creed  was  accepted  by  the  Corporation, 
as  affording  satisfactory  evidence,  that  the  ^  substance 
of  doctrine,'  in  the  platform,  is  fully  maintained." 

In  their  statement,  the  professors  present  a  synopsis 
of  the  doctrines  of  the  Reformation,  which  probably  con- 
tains the  most  precise  definition  to  be  obtained,  of  the 
extent  to  which  the  plea  of  substance  of  doctrine  is  held 
to  justify  deviation  from  those  doctrines  which  are  com- 
prehended in  a  strict  subscription. 

"  It  will  be  generally  agreed  that  the  cardinal  doc- 
trines of  the  Reformation  were  the  following : 

"  The  entire  depravity  and  ruin  of  man  by  nature,  as 
the  result  of  the  sin  of  Adam.  Justification  by  faith, 
through  the  atonement  of  Clirist,  to  the  exclusion  of  all 
merit  in  the  recipient.  The  necessity  of  regeneration, 
by  the  special  or  distinguishing  influences  of  the  Holy 
Spirit.  The  eternal  and  personal  election  of  a  part  of 
our  race  to  holiness  and  salvation.  The  final  perse- 
verance of  all  who  are  thus  chosen  unto  eternal  life. — 
'These,  taken  in  connection  with  the  doctrine  of  the 
Trinity ;  of  the  eternal  punishment  of  the  finally  im- 
penitent; and  of  the  divine  decrees,  which  is  partly 
involved  in  that  of  election,  congtitute  what  may  be 
called  the  Primary  Doctrines  of  the  Reformation. 

"  In  addition  to  these,  we  find,  in  the  writings  of 
some  of  the  Reformers,  and  of  the  Puritan  divines,  an- 
other class  of  statements,  whose  object  was  to  reconcile 
the  doctrines  enumerated  above,  with  the  principles  of 
right  reason ;  and  to  reduce  them  to  a  harmonious  sys- 
tem of  faith.  These  may  be  called  Secondary,  or  Ex- 
planatory Doctrines.  As  example  of  these  we  may 
mention : — The  imputation  of  Adam's  sin  to  all   his 

18* 


210  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL, 

descendants,  in  such  a  manner  as  to  make  them  guilty 
and  punished,  in  the  operation  of  strict  justice,  on 
account  of  his  act.  The  imputation  of  Christ's  right- 
eousness, to  the  believer,  as  the  ground  of  his  partici- 
pating, on  the  same  principles  of  strict  justice,  in  the 
benefits  of  his  death.  The  doctrine  of  particular  re- 
demption, or  the  limitation  of  the  atonement  to  the 
elect.  The  doctrine  of  man's  entire  want  of  power  to 
any  but  sinful  actions,  as  accounting  for  his  dependence 
on  God  for  a  change  of  heart ;  et  ccei. 

"  Many  of  the  old  divines  attached  high  importance 
to  this  latter  class  of  doctrines,  though  differently  stated 
by  different  writers ;  but  they  did  so,  only  because  they 
considered  them  essential  to  a  defence  of  the  primary 
doctrines,  enumerated  above.  In  the  ]3rogress  of  men- 
tal and  moral  science,  however,  a  great  change  of  senti- 
ment has  taken  place,  in  this  respect.  One  after  another 
of  these  secondary,  or  explanatory  doctrines  has  been 
laid  aside.  Other  modes  have  been  adopted,  of  harmo- 
nizing the  orthodox  system  of  faith,  and  reconciling  it 
to  the  principles  of  right  reason,  more  conformable,  it 
is  believed,  to  the  simplicity  of  the  Gospel ;  without 
diminishing,  but,  rather,  increasing,  the  attachment  felt 
for  the  primary  doctrines  of  the  Reformation.'^ 

The  former  class,  it  will  be  observed,  constitute  "  the 
system  of  doctrines."  The  latter  are  explanatory  of  it 
and  may  be  rejected,  with  a  good  conscience,  by  one 
who  declares  his  acceptance  of  the  Confession,  as  con- 
taining ^'  tlie  system  of  doctrines  taught  in  the  Holy 
Scriptures."  It  contains  ^^the  system;"  and  much 
more ! 

It  is  significant,  that  the  creed  of  East  Windsor,  as 


THE  CONTROVERSY  IN  NEW  ENGLAND.    211 

alread}'  exhibited,  tacitly  recognized  this  same  distiuc- 
tion,  and  ignores  all  but  the  "  Primary  doctrines/' 

For  a  time,  Andover  Seminary  was  looked  upon  as  a 
reliable  bulwark.  Dr.  Woods,  the  professor  of  theol- 
ogy, was  one  of  the  first  and  firmest  to  challenge  the 
teachings  of  New  Haven,  and  warn  the  churches  of  the 
dangerous  character  of  the  doctrines  there  promulgated. 
But  Dr.  Woods,  himself,  at  first,  denied  utterly  the 
doctrine  of  imputation. — "  The  imputation  of  Adam's 
sin  to  his  posterity,  in  any  sense  which  those  words 
naturally  and  properly  convey,  is  a  doctrine  which  we 
do  not  believe.''*  At  a  later  period  iu/^his  life,  he 
changed  his  views,  as  to  the  propriety  of  retaining  the 
phraseology  of  the  Catechism,  on  the  subject.  But  he 
so  explained  the  imputation  both  of  Adam's  sin  and  of 
the  righteousness  of  Christ,  as  to  harmonize  avowedly 
w^ith  Hopkins,  and  Emmons,  and  the  younger  Edwards, 
who  openly  and  consistently  denied  it.  Speaking  of 
the  younger  Edwards'  account  of  the  improvements  in 
theology  made  by  his  father,  Hopkins,  and  others.  Dr. 
Woods  asserts  that,  to  the  true  doctrine  of  justification, 
by  the  imputed  righteousness  of  Christ,  the  younger 
Edwards  makes  no  objection.  "All  the  improvement  he 
mentions,  is,  that  a  mistaken  idea  of  j  ustification  had 
been  renounced,  and  a  just  idea  adopted."  "Any  one, 
who  examines  the  matter,  will  find  that  Willard  and 
the  old  Calvinists  explain  and  defend  the  doctrine  of 
imputed  righteousness,  much  in  the  same  manner  with 
Edwards,  both  fiither  and  son."  Hopkins  and  Em- 
mons, he  says,  "  Professedly  rejected  the  doctrine  of  im- 
puted righteousness."  But  he  insists  that  it  was  not 
*  Woods'  Letters  to  Unitarians,  p.  44. 


212  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

the  genuine  doctrine  which  they  repudiated ;  but  a 
caricature.  They  really  held  the  doctrine;  only  they 
were  not  aware  of  it  !* 

One  thing  is  certain,  that  if  the  doctrine  of  Hopkins 
and  the  younger  Edwards,  as  thus  endorsed  by  Woods, 
be  the  true  doctrine  of  imputation,  the  Reformers  and 
Assembly  of  Divines  were  strangers  to  it. 

The  position  of  Dr.  Woods,  of  itself,  implies  a 
remarkable  state  of  sentiment,  among  those  who 
founded  and  governed  the  institution  at  Andover.  The 
Constitution,  ordained  by  the  founders,  provides  that 
every  professor  in  the  seminary  shall  be  a  man  of 
sound  and  orthodox  principles,  according  to  the  system 
of  doctrines  denominated  the  Westminster  Assembly's 
Shorter  Catechism.  Every  professor  must,  on  the  day 
of  his  inauguration,  publicly  make  and  subscribe  a 
solemn  declaration  of  his  faith  in  divine  revelation,  and 
in  the  doctrines  of  the  Catechism.  He  must  solemnly 
promise  to  defend  and  inculcate  the  Christian  faith,  as 
thus  expressed,  in  opposition  to  all  contrary  doctrines 
and  heresies.  He  must  repeat  the  declaration  and 
promise,  at  the  close  of  every  five  years ;  and  should  he 
refuse  this,  or,  should  he  teach  or  embrace  any  of  the 
proscribed  heresies  or  errors,  he  shall  be,  forthwith 
removed  from  office. 

Yet,  it  is  doubtful  whether  one  of  the  founders  be- 
lieved the  fundamental  doctrine  of  imputation,  as  stated 
in  the  Catechism ;  or,  expected  it  to  be  taught.  It  is, 
therefore,  no  just  matter  of  surprise,  that,  for  years, 
whilst  the  instructions  from  the  chair  of  Christian  The- 
ology were  so  indeterminate,  as  to  be  comprehensive  of 
*  Woods'  Theology  of  the  Puritans,  chap.  iv. 


THE   CONTROVERSY   IN    NEW   ENGLAND.  213 

every  school  of  Xew  England  divinity,  prior  to  the  rise 
of  New  Haven, — if  we  may  judge  from  the  statements 
of  Dr.  AYoods,  above  cited, — any  orthodox  tendencies, 
were  neutralized  by  the  more  definite  and  brilliant  pre- 
lections of  the  other  instructors.  The  vague  and  inad- 
equate conceptions  of  Professor  Stuart,  respecting  the 
atonement,  published  in  1824,  were  followed  by  his  denial 
of  the  eternal  Sonship  of  Christ,  and  his  doctrine  on  the 
nature  of  sin,  put  forth  in  his  Commentary  on  the  Ro- 
mans, and  his  Essay  on  Sin,  the  doctrine  of  which  differs 
scarcely  a  shade  from  that  of  the  New  Haven  professors. 
And,  soon,  the  chair  of  divinity,  itself,  was  occupied  by 
the  inventor  of  the  subtle  distinction  between  the  theol- 
ogy of  the  intellect,  and  the  theology  of  the  feelings ;  and 
the  youth  of  And  over  are  openly  taught  to  reject  with 
scorn  the  doctrine  of  original  sin ;  to  regard  regenera- 
tion, as  a  change  in  the  balance  of  the  susceptibilities  ; 
to  deny  the  doctrine  of  the  covenant  of  works ;  the 
satisfaction  of  Christ;  and  the  justification  of  believers, 
through  the  merits  of  his  righteousness,  imputed  to 
them.  And,  now,  the  ultimate  and  not  distant  point, 
to  which  all  these  currents  tend,  is  plainly  indicated,  in 
the  fact,  recently  announced,  that,  "  In  one  year,  five  of 
the  students  of  Andover  lapsed  into  Universalism.'''^ 
Similar  phenomena  are  developing  at  the  most  of  the 
other  New  England  schools. 

The  facts  here  narrated  lead  to  the  conviction,  that 
the  causes  of  defection  must  have  been  widespread,  and 
the  defences  of  the  ancient  faith  o;enerallv  removed. 
In  New   Haven,   itself,   Goodrich,    Fitch  and   Taylor, 

*Kev.  L.  S.  Childs,  D.D.,  in  "The  Hartford  Ordination,"  1860, 
pp.  64,  8vo.,  p.  43. 


214  HISTORY   OF    THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

each,  independently  and  simultaneously,  came  to  the 
same  position,  on  the  nature  of  sin, — the  fundamental 
question  in  the  whole  controversy.  And,  at  Andover, 
— notwithstandino;  the  antag-onism  toward  that  institu- 
tion  and  its  former  theology,  in  which  New  Haven 
avowedly  originated ;  the  spirit  of  emulation  and 
rivalry,  incident  to  the  situation ;  the  actual  standard 
of  opposition  reared  by  Professor  Woods ;  and  the 
punctual  and  solemn  exhibition  and  adoption  of  the 
Catechism,  every  five  years ;  the  same  heresies  soon 
gained  an  easy  possession,  and  now  hold  undisputed 
control.  Nor  may  the  fact  be  overlooked,  that  no  such 
defection  in  the  seminaries,  could  have  taken  place,  or 
would  have  been  tolerated,  unless  the  same  causes  had 
wrought  similar  results,  among  the  ministry  at  large. 
To  the  question.  What  is  the  secret  of  this  most 
'^  strange  and  lamentable  phenomenon  ?  there  can  be  but 
i  one  answer.  The  cause  of  all  these  doctrinal  aberra- 
tions is  to  be  found  in  the  various  features  of  the  Ed- 
wardean  system,  already  exhibited ;  especially,  in  the 
doctrine  as  to  the  nature  of  sin  and  holiness ;  and  in 
the  denial  of  the  representative  office  of  Adam,  and  of 
the  fact,  thence  resulting,  that  "  we  sinned  in  him  and 
fell  with  him,  in  his  first  transgression."  The  rejection 
of  this  fundamental  doctrine  carried  with  it,  inevitably, 
the  repudiation  of  the  parallel  doctrine  of  justification, 
by  the  imputed  righteousness  of  Christ ;  and  these  two  y 
being  removed,  all  is  gone. 

Upon  the  denial  of  original  sin  imputed,  at  once 
arose  the  two  questions.  How  then  did  sin  originate? 
and.  What  is  its  nature?  And,  from  the  answers  to 
these  questions, — conformed  to  the  denial  of  our  siu 


THE  COXTEOYERSY  IN  NEW  ENGLAND.     215 

and  fall  in  Adam,  resulted  a  necessary  reconstruction  of 
the  whole  system  of  theology.  From  the  subtle  specu- 
lations of  Taylor,  and  the  plausible  theory  of  Stuart,  to 
the  wild  and  despairing  fancies  of  the  author  of  the 
Conflict  of  Ages,  CYcry  scheme  that  has  been  substi- 
tuted instead  of  tliat  of  the  Westminster  divines,  was 
originated  in  the  struggle  to  find  some  means  to  account 
for  sin,  the  efficient  connection  between  us  and  Adam 
being  denied. 

And,  then,  the  landmarks  of  a  strict  adoption  of  the 
Confession  being,  by  common  consent,  removed,  there 
remained  no  longer  any  barrier  of  warning  or  restraint. 
Each  one  claiming  the  right  to  depart  from  the  received 
system,  at  least  on  that  fundamental  point,- — no  one  was 
entitled  to  limit  his  brother  by  the  measure  of  his  own 
aberration.  Thus,  conscience  was  satisfied,  and  ecclesi- 
astical authority  disarmed.  At  first  it  was  but  a  rivulet, 
which  stole  through  the  embankments.  But  it  was  the 
letting  out  of  waters ;  and  the  crevasse  which  followed 
was  as  inevitable  as  the  relation  of  cause  and  effect. 

The  system  of  ^ew  divinity  started  out,  professedly, 
in  the  interest  of  vital  religion,  and  zeal  for  the  salva- 
tion of  souls ;  and,  in  all  its  history,  wherever  propa- 
gated, it  has  assumed  this  guise,  and  affected  to  oppose 
itself  to  a  "dead  orthodoxy.^'  In  this  connection,  the 
fact  is  of  interest,  that,  from  the  origin  of  the  New 
Haven  heresy,  the  opposition  of  Nettleton  was  prompt, 
open  and  consistent,  to  the  last  day  of  his  life.  Per- 
haps, no  other  man  in  this  country,  during  the  present 
century,  has  been  more  blessed  of  God  in  winning  souls. 
Long  before  the  new  system  had  been  promulgated, 
which  held  forth  promises  so  bright  for  the  reviving  of 


216  HISTORY    OF    THE    NEW   SCHOOL. 

religion,  the  old  doctrines  had  been  well  proved  by  Net- 
tleton's  hands  ;  and  found  to  be  the  wisdom  of  God,  and 
the  power  of  God,  to  salvation  to  many.  Not  only  did  he 
refuse  to  exchange  the  weapons  thus  tried,  for  the  new 
forgings  of  New  Haven.  Not  only  did  he  urge  his  ex- 
postulations, personally,  upon  Drs.  Taylor  and  Beecher. 
But  he  sent  forth  warnings  to  the  churches,  in  tones  so 
unambiguous  as  greatly  to  annoy  those  gentlemen  ;  who 
affected  to  regard  themselves  as  the  authors  of  his  cha- 
racter and  influence.  "  Dr.  Taylor  and  I  have  made 
you  what  you  are,"  said  Dr.  Beecher  to  him,  "  and,  if 
you  do  not  behave  yourself,  we  will  hew  you  down.'' 
This  language  the  Doctor  afterward  explained  as  a 
jest ;  a  fact,  however,  which  he  seems  not  to  have  men- 
tioned, when  he  told  the  story  to  Dr.  Taylor,  by  whom 
it  was  repeated.  Whether  jesting,  however,  or  earnest, 
this  avowal  was  not  necessary,  in  order  to  ascertain  the 
position  of  the  parties.  The  Pelagian  controversy  began, 
at  the  first  instant,  in  hostilities  declared,-  between  its 
authors  and  this  true  representative  of  the  scriptural 
piety  and  the  pure  and  Spirit-born  revivals  of  the 
ancient  faith. 


CHAPTER  XIV. 

PRACTICAL   PELAGIANISM. 

Finney's  sermons — "  Sinners  bound  to  change  their  own  hearts"  — 
"What  is  the  cliange? — Sinners  can  do  it — What  part  the  Spirit 
takes  in  it — "  How  to  change  your  heart" — It  is  to  be  done  by  cer- 
tain considerations — Ability  the  measure  of  obligation — The  issue 
between  God  and  man  a  mere  question  of  sovereignty — Effect  of 
the  system  inducing  self-sufficiencv  and  irreverence — Practical  ob- 
ject  of  preaching— Philosophy  of  the  new  measures — Pude  style 
of  speech — Irreverence — "  Fervency"  in  prayer — Particularity — 
Telling  God  the  truth  about  people — Protracted  praying — Women 
praying  in  public — The  "  prayer  of  faith" — The  "  holy  band" — Its 
self-confidence  and  arrogance — Exciting  style  and  particularity  in 
preaching — The  process  of  a  Pelagian  revival — The  results — These 
the  legitimate  fruits  of  the  New  Haven  theology. 

The  Rev.  Charles  G.  Finney  was  the  first  preacher, 
who  adequately  attempted  to  employ  the  theology  of 
New  Haven,  in  its  practical  relations.  His  "  Sermons 
on  Important  Subjects"  present  favorable  illustrations 
of  his  practical  system.  Of  their  publication,  he  stated, 
in  the  preface,  that,  "  As  my  health  has  been  such  as  to 
render  it  probable  that  I  shall  never  be  able  to  labor  as 
an  evangelist  again,  I  have  thought  that  it  might,  in 
some  measure,  subserve  the  cause  of  Christ,  to  publish 
something,  on  several  points,  that  I  have  found,  by  ex- 
perience, to  need  discussion  and  explanation."* 

*  Preface,  p.  vi.,  3d  edition,  1836. 
19  217 


218  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

We  have,  here,  therefore,  the  views  which  his  matiirest 
experience,  as  an  evangelist,  induced  him  to  present  and 
insist  upon.  The  first  and  second  of  these  discourses 
are  founded  upon  Ezekiel  xviii.  31,  and  are  entitled, 
"  Sinners  bound  to  change  their  own  hearts ;"  and  "How 
to  change  your  heart." 

In    the  first    of  these,   the   preacher   states    what    a 
"  spiritual  heart"  is.     It  "  is  that  deep-seated  but  volun- 
tary preference  of  the  mind,  which  lies  back  of  all  its 
other  voluntary  affections  and  emotions,  and  from  which 
thev  take  their  character.     In  this  sense,  I  understand 
the  term,  heart,  to  be  used,  in  the  text.     It  is,  evidently, 
something  over  which  we  have  control,  something  volun- 
tary ;  something  for  which  we  are  to  blame,  and  which 
we  are  bound  to  alter."     "  A  change  of  heart  consists 
in  changing  the  controlling  preference  of  the  mind,  in 
regard  to  the  end  of  pursuit.     The  selfish  heart  is  a  pre- 
ference of  self-interest,   to   the  glory  of  God,  and  the 
interests  of  his  kingdom.     A  new  heart  consists  in  a 
preference  of  the  glory  of  God,  and  the  interests  of  his 
kingdom,  to  one's  own  happiness."     '^  It  is  a  change  in 
the  choice  of  a  Supreme  Rulers     In  the  entire  discourse, 
there  is  not  a  word  of  self-loathing,  in  view  of  the  in- 
effable holiness  of  God,  nor  of  recourse  to  the  Fountain 
of   cleansing  for   sin.       In   fact,    Christ    is    altogether 
ignored,  in  his  true  character;  and  is  only  known  as 
the  preferred  candidate  for  gubernatorial  honors.     As  a 
citizen  may  change  his  politics,  "  so  with  a  sinner  ;  if 
his  heart  is  changed,  you  will  see  that  Christians  become 
his  friends,  Christ  his  candidate."     "  Now,  the  language 
of  his  heart  and  life  is,  ^  Let  Christ  rule,  king  of  na- 
tions, as  he  is  king  of  saints.'"     This  presents  a  per- 


PRACTICAL   PELAGIANISM.  219 

fectly  adequate  view  of  the  whole  system. — All  sin  is 
selfishness ;    and   the  whole  question,  involved  in    the 
matter  of  salvation,  is,  a  political  issue  between  self  and 
\/God, — who  shall  be  king, — Christ,  or,  Satan. 

The  preacher  next  shows  the  requirement  of  the  text 
to  be  reasonable  and  equitable.  It  is  so,  because  it  is 
fully  within  man's  power  to  make  the  change.  ^^  Sup- 
pose God  should  command  a  man  to  fly;  would  the 
command  impose  upon  him  any  obligation,  until  he  is 
furnished  with  wings  ?  Certainly  not.'^  "  As,  there- 
fore, God  requires  men  to  make  to  themselves  a  new 
heart,  on  pain  of  eternal  death,  it  is  the  strongest  pos- 
sible evidence  that  they  are  able  to  do  it." 

But,  how  is  all  this  consistent  with  the  Bible  state- 
ments  that   a  new  heart   is   the  gift   of  God?      The 
preacher  answers  : — "  There  is  a  sense  in  which  conver- 
sion is  the  work  of  God.     There  is  a  sense  in  which  it 
is  the  effect  of  truth.     There  is  a  sense  in  which  the 
preacher  does  it.     And  it  is,  also,  the  appropriate  work 
of  the  sinner,  himself.      The  fact  is,  that  the  actual 
turning,  or  change,  is  the  sinner's  own  act.     The  agent 
who  induces  him,  is  the  Spirit  of  God,     A  secondary 
agent  is  the  preacher  or  individual  who  presents  the 
truth.     The  truth  is  the  instrument,  or  motive,  which 
the  Spirit  uses,  to  induce  the  sinner  to  turn."     A  man, 
in  a  reverie,  is  unconsciously  aj^proaching  the  verge  of 
Niagara.      You    call    to    him, —  '^Stop!"     He  hears; 
sees  his  danger,  and  turns.     You  thus  save  him.     The 
word,  "Stop,"  saves  him.     But  the  man  says,  "If  I 
had    not   turned,   I   should    have  been   a  dead   man." 
"  Here,  he  speaks  of  it,  and  truly,  as  his  own  act."     So 
here,  "  Not  only  does  the  preacher  say,  Stoj),  but,  through 


220  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

tlie  living  voice  of  the  preacher,  the  Spirit  cries,  Stop. 
The  preacher  cries,  ^  Turn  ye,  why  will  ye  die  ?'  The 
Spirit  pours  the  expostulation  home,  with  such  power 
that  the  sinner  turns.  Now,  in  speaking  of  this  change, 
it  is  perfectly  proper  to  say,  that  the  Spirit  turned  him ; 
just  as  you  would  say  of  a  man,  who  had  persuaded 
another  to  change  his  mind,  on  the  subject  of  politics, 
that  he  had  converted  him,  and  brought  him  over.'' 
*^  Now,  it  is  strictly  true,  and  true,  in  the  most  absolute 
and  highest  sense,  the  act  is  his  own  act,  the  turning 
is  his  own  turning ;-  while  God,  by  the  truth,  has  in- 
duced him  to  turn,  still,  it  is  strictly  true  that  he  has 
turned,  and  has  done  it  himself."  ""  The  striving  of 
the  Spirit  of  God  with  men,  is  not  a  physical  scuffling, 
but  a  debate ;  a  strife,  not  of  body  with  body,  but  of 
mind  with  mind ;  and  that,  in  the  action  and  reaction 
of  vehement  argumentation." 

From  such  premises,  the  conclusion  is  easily  drawn, 
that  ''  if  the  sinner  ever  has  a  new  heart,  he  must  obey 
the  command  of  the  text,  and  make  it,  liimself."  But, 
if  this  be  so,  "  why  does  he  need  the  Spirit  of  God  ?" 
/  For  the  same  reason  that  a  man  who  can  pay  his  debts, 
[but  will  not,  needs  the  appliances  of  the  law,  to  make 
him  willing,  as  well  as  able. 

In  the  second  discourse,  we  have  the  answer  to  the 
great  question,  to  which  the  preacher  has  brought  us, — 
"  How  to  change  your  heart."  We  have  already  seen, 
that,  in  Taylor's  means  of  regeneration,  the  first  step 
is,  to  bring  selfishness  into  a  passive  state ;  after  having 
accomplished  which,  he  finds  all  else  easy.  But  he  fails 
to  tell  how  selfishness  is  to  be  thus  disposed  of.  To 
this  point,  the  whole  attention  of  Mr.  Finney  is  now 


PRACTICAL   PELAGIANISM.  221 

turned.  First,  he  warns  us,  tliat  the  change  of  heart 
is  not  to  be  accomplished  by  an  arbitrary  calling  up  of 
a  given  set  of  feelings  or  emotions.  To  acquire  these, 
we  must  look,  not  at  them,  but  at  considerations  appro- 
priate to  induce  them.  "  If  you  will  give  attention,  I 
will  try  to  place  before  you  such  considerations  as  are 
best  calculated  to  induce  the  state  of  mind  which  con- 
stitutes a  change  of  heart.'' 

What  a  miserable  falling  off  is  this  !  We  have  just 
been  assured,  in  the  most  emphatic  manner,  that  we 
ourselves  can  work  this  change, — that,  if  it  is  ever  done, 
we,  and  we  only,  must  do  it.  Now,  when  we  are  ready 
to  attempt  this  great  work,  we  are  remanded  to  consider- 
ations which  may  perhaps  do  it  for  us.  The  thing  to 
be  accomplished  is,  to  get  rid  of  the  affection  of  selfish- 
ness, and  to  acquire  that  of  benevolence, — love  to  God 
and  man.  But  these  ive  cannot  command ; — perhaps 
certain  considerations  may  !  But  what  are  these  potent 
considerations,  which  are  the  best  calculated  to  change 
the  will  and  turn  the  heart  ?  Are  they  drawn  from  the 
infinite  love  of  God,  in  giving  his  Son,  to  satisfy  jus- 
tice, and  atone  for  sin?  Are  they  derived  from  the 
scenes  of  Gethsemane,  the  judgment-hall,  and  Calvary? 
No ;  these  are  altogether  ignored,  except  in  a  passing 
allusion  to  them,  as  illustrations  of  the  self-denial  of 
God  worthy  of  our  imitation  !  The  considerations, — the 
only  ones  presented,  are  these  : — ''  First,  fix  your  mind 
'^upon  the  unreasonableness  and  hatefulness  of  selfish- 
ness.'' "Next,  look  at  the  reasonableness  and  utility 
of  benevolence."  "Again,  consider  the  reasons  why 
God  should  govern  the  universe."  Such  are  the  con- 
siderations, by  means  of  which  the  inquiring  sinner  is 

19* 


222  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

instructed  that  he  can  make  himself  a  new  heart.     Such, 

« 

the  practical  theology,  which,  emanating  from  New 
Haven,  became  the  legitimate  parent  of  the  wildest 
extravagance  and  fanaticism,  in  New  England  and  the 
Presbyterian  Church. 

The  fundamental  principle  of  all  the  teaching  was, 
that  ability  is  absolutely  the  measure  of  obligation. 
The  argument  proceeded  to  the  assumption  that,  such 
being  the  case,  a  just  God  will  not  hold  us  under  obli- 
gation, unless  we  have  the  corresponding  ability. 
Hence,  the  conclusion  was  deduced,  that,  whatever  the 
Bible  exhibits  as  a  duty,  we  now  can  do.  The  point 
considered  in  the  above  discourses  was  only  one  appli- 
cation of  this  general  principle.  "  As  God  requires 
men  to  make  to  themselves  a  new  heart,  on  pain  of 
eternal  death,  it  is  the  strongest  possible  evidence  that 
they  are  able  to  do  it.  To  say  that  he  has  commanded 
them  to  do  it,  without  telling  them  they  are  able,  is 
consummate  trifling.  Their  ability  is  implied  as 
strongly  as  can  be,  in  the  command  itself.^' 

This  heresy  involved  with  it  a  corresponding  view, 
as  to  the  office  of  the  preaching  of  the  gospel  and  the 
other  means  of  grace.  The  word  preached  was  not 
only  different  from  that  of  the  orthodox  Church  of  God, 
in  all  ages,  with  resj^ect  to  this  point  of  ability,  but, 
also,  as  to  the  matter,  otherwise,  of  tlie  gospel  preached. 
In  order  to  sustain  the  doctrine  of  ability,  sin  was 
relieved  of  its  radical  and  inveterate  nature,  and 
reduced  to  a  mere  perversity  of  will,  completely  within 
man's  control.  Not  only,  therefore,  was  the  office  of  the 
Spirit  obscured  and  lost,  but  the  precious  blood  of 
Calvary  became  comparatively  valueless,  and  the  doc- 


PEACTICAL   PELAGIANISM.  223 

trine  of  the  cross  of  no  repute,  —disparaged,  alike,  by 
the  denial  of  the  infinite  evil  of  sin,  and  the  assertion 
that  Christ  did  not,  in  fact,  suffer  its  penalty.  In  a 
word,  the  whole  issue  between  God  and  the  sinner, — 
justice  being  ignored, — was  reduced  to  a  question  of 
sovereignty,  debated  between  the  will  of  man  and  the 
rights  of  God.  It  is  no  longer,  an  issue  between  infi- 
nite holiness  and  unspeakable  vileness  and  depravity ; 
but  a  conflict  between  selfishness  and  benevolence, — a 
contest  waged  at  the  bar  of  man's  free  will,  between 
God  and  Satan,  who  shall  be  sovereign; — a  contest,  the 
decision  of  which  is  with  tire  will  of  man ;  whilst  God's 
only  remedy  is,  to  avenge  himself,  by  making  man  "  as 
miserable  as  he  can." 

The  result  of  all  this  Avas,  that  the  preaching  of  the 
cross  became  foolishness ;  the  announcement  of  the 
Spirit,  as  the  omnipotent  and  sovereign  Renewer,  was 
condemned,  as  calculated  to  encourage  men  in  indiffer- 
ence and  ungodliness ;  and  the  preaching  and  other 
instrumentalities,  devised  and  employed,  were  directed 
to  one  object, — by  arguments,  by  terrors,  by  entreaties, 
by  vituperation,  by  clamor  and  excitement,  by  protracted 
and  exhausting  exercises,  by  any  means, — to  break  down 
the  sinner's  will,  and  induce  him  to  ^'  submit  to  God." 

Another  result,  directly  flowing  from  these  doctrines, 
was  the  cultivation  of  a  spirit  of  the  most  shocking 
irreverence  and  profanity.  The  theory  professed  to  en- 
throne God.  But  the  throne  accorded  to  him  was  not 
his  own  seat  of  unapproachable  majesty  and  glory ;  but, 
an  exaltation  conferred  upon  him  by  the  free  suffrages 
of  those  who  prefer  him  as  "  candidate,"  for  governor. 
In  the  Spirit,  they  did  not  recognize  a  creative  energy, 


224  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW  SCHOOL. 

"  according  to  the  working  of  his  mighty  power  which 
he  wrought  in  Christ  Jesus,  when  he  raised  him  from 
the  dead," — but  only  a  debater,  skillful,  indeed;  but 
not  so  much  so,  that  they  had  not  long  resisted  his 
arguments ;  and  could  have  done  so  for  ever,  had  they 
chosen. 

The  disciple  of  this  system,  having  tested  and  proved 
his  own  powers, — by  resisting  the  Spirit,  as  long  as  he 
pleased,  and  withholding  sovereignty  from  Jehovah ; 
and  then,  by  a  voluntary  surrender,  and  making  him- 
self a  new  heart, — felt  entitled  to  tg^ke  great  liberties 
with  the  adorable  Godhead,  and  to  be  very  familiar  with 
Heaven.  He  claimed  to  ^'  have  power  with  God," — 
power  to  ask  and  receive  whatever  he  chose. 

The  picture  is  revolting  ;  but  it  is  real ;  and  the 
warning  it  conveys  is  one  to  which  the  Church  should 
give  solemn  heed. 

The  system  attained  to  its  logical  results,  in  the  per- 
fectionism which  sprang  up,  broadcast,  as  an  after-crop, 
in  Western  New  York ;  and  which  Mr.  Finney,  him- 
self, at  length  embraced,  and  transplanted  to  the 
congenial  soil  of  Oberlin,  Ohio, — soil,  in  both  regions, 
fallowed  for  such  harvests,  by  the  operation  of  the 
Plan  of  Union.  If  the  divine  commands  are  criteria 
of  our  ability,  the  words,  ^^  Be  ye  perfect,  even  as  your 
Father  which  is  in  heaven  is  perfect,"  are  an  assurance 
that  we  can  be  perfect,  as  God. 

It  is  not  our  design  to  trace  the  history  of  this  system 
of  doctrines  and  measures,  as  it  triumphed,  in  a  succes- 
sion of  misnamed  revivals,  in  New  England,  and 
especially  among  the  mixed  congregations  of  the  P];iii 
of  Union,  in  Western  New  York.     That  regioii   was 


PRACTICAL   PELAGIAXISM.  225 

swept,  as  with  wild-fire,  by  the  excitement  of  the  new 
gospel ;  and  left  barren  and  parched,  an  easy  prey  to 
every  form  of  fanaticism  and  satanic  delusion. 

Some  illustrations  of  the  system  of  new  measures, 
born  of  the  new  theology,  are  now  to  be  presented. 
In  perfect  harmony  with  the  principles  already  stated, 
as  determining  the  whole  development,  was  the  dictnm, 
which  was  avowed  by  Mr.  Finney  as  deciding  the  selec- 
tion and  use  of  means  of  grace.  ^*  The  object  of  the 
ministry,  is  to  get  all  the  people  to  feel  that  the  devil 
has  no  right  to  rule  tliis  world  ;  but  that  they  ought 
all  to  give  themselves  to  God,  and  vote  in  the  Lord 
Jesus  Christ,  as  governor  of  the  universe.  Now  wdmt 
shall  be  done  ?  AVhat  measures  shall  we  take  ?  Says 
one,  ^  Be  sure  and  have  nothing  that  is  new.'  Strange  ! 
The  object  of  our  measures  is  to  gain  attention,  and 
you  must  have  something  new.  As  sure  as  the  effect  of 
a  measure  becomes  stereotyped,  it  ceases  to  gain  atten- 
tion, and  you  must  try  something  new."  By  skillful 
use  of  these  new  means,  he  thinks  attention  may  be 
kept  awake  for  a  long  course  of  years,  "  until  our  present 
measures  will,  bv  and  bv,  have  sufficient  noveltv  in 
them,  again,  to  attract  and  fix  the  public  attention. 
And  so,  we  shall  never  want,  for  something  new."* 

If  the  work  of  regeneration  is  one  to  be  performed 
by  men  themselves,  all  this  is  evidently  most  proper. 
At  the  same  time,  it  involves  the  introduction  of  a 
great  diversity  of  measures,  as  the  wit  or  fancy  of  dif- 
ferent preachers  happens  to  be  more  or  less  inventive. 
The  following  were  some  of  the  leading  measures  em- 
ployed by  Mr.  Finney  and  his  immediate  followers. 
*  Finney's  Lectures  on  Revivals  of  Keligion :  Boston^  1835. 


226  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

Conspicuous  to  the  first  glance  of  observation,  was  a 
rude  and  vulgar  dialect,  ornamented  with  a  selection 
of  slang  expressions,  enforced  by  grimaces,  and  theatri- 
cal gestures.  ''  Dignity,  indeed  !"  cries  Mr.  Finney, 
"Just  the  language  of  the  devil  !'^  "Let  hell  boil 
over,  if  it  will,  and  spew  out  as  many  devils  as  there 
are  stones  in  the  pavement,"  etc. 

Akin  to  this,  are  the  irreverence  and  profanity  which 
were  characteristic,  not  of  Mr.  Finney  alone,  but  of  the 
whole  class  of  Pelagian  revivalists.  Says  Mr.  Finney, 
"  Perhaps  it  is  not  too  much  to  say,  that  it  is  impossi- 
ble for  God  himself  to  bring  about  reformations,  but 
by  new  measures.^^  "  God  cannot  sustain  this  free  and 
blessed  country,  which  we  love  and  pray  for,  unless  the 
Church  will  take  right  ground"  in  regard  to  politics. 
Many  expressions  thus  used  are  too  shocking  to  repeat. 
Mr.  Nettleton  quotes  the  exclamation  of  a  pious  colored 
woman  of  Troy,- — "  I  do  wonder  what  has  got  all  the 
ministers  to  swear  so,  in  the  pulpit." 

Another  revolting  feature  of  the  system  v*^as  the  style 
of  prayer  employed.  "  Father  Nash,  the  praying  man," 
was  a  special  favorite  and  co-laborer  with  Mr.  Finney, 
in  Troy.  "  He  perhaps  exceeded  all  others  in  the  fre- 
quent repetition  of, — '  O  God  Almighty, — Come,  God 
Almighty, — Come  down, — break  in  upon  them.^  After 
continuing  these  strains,  sometimes  for  a  Avhole  hour, 
alternately  upon  his  knees,  but  more  frequently  sitting 
back  upon  his  heels ;  writhing,  as  in  an  agony,  throw- 
ing himself  as  far  back  as  he  could  and  recover,  and  then 
bringing  his  head  forward  into  his  chair ;  rising  and 
bringing  the  weight  of  his  fists  to  bear  upon  it,  and 
give  emphasis  to  his  expressions  ;  after  continuing  thus 


PRACTICAL   PELAGIANISM.  227 

agonized  in  prayer,  as  he  called  it,  for  a  whole  hour,  he 
wo  aid  sometimes  pitch  forward  into  his  chair,  some- 
times throw  himself  backward ;  sometimes  rise  and 
walk,  as  though  hurried  with  a  resistless  impetus,  and 
cry,  ^  O  God  !  O  God  !  O  God  !'"* 

Connected  with  this  wrestling^  was  wliat  was  much 
insisted  upon, — particularity  in  prayer;  that  is,  the 
naming  and  describing  those  to  be  prayed  for.  "  The 
first  thing,  to  be  regarded  as  indispensable,  is,  to  intro- 
duce the  individual  by  name,  and,  in  this,  great  care  is 
to  be  taken,  that  the  name  be  rightly  called ;  as  a  mis- 
nomer has,  it  is  said,  been  the  occasion  of  disappoint- 
ment, in  the  looked-for  result.  The  next  thing  in  order 
is,  to  tell  what  God  knows  of  the  individual.  If  per- 
chance, the  subject  be  a  female,  her  sex  must  first  be 
noticed,  followed  witli,  '  O  Lord,  thou  seest  this  hard- 
ened enemy  of  thine,'  (for  it  has  been  considered  wicked- 
ness to  call  a  sinner  by  a  softer  name,  than  God's  enemy.) 
^  Thou  seest  how  she  has  raised  her  female  hands  against 
thee,  and  how  she  is  stretching  out  her  puny  female 
hands  to  lay  hold  of  thee  and  pull  thee  from  thy  throne ! 
See,  Lord,  how  full  her  hands  are  of  sharp  arrows,  to 
fight  thee  !  Thou  seest  how  she  is  hurling  her  defi- 
ance at  thee.  Thou  knowest  how  black  her  heart  is, 
and  how  her  enmity  to  thee  rankles  and  burns  like  the 
malice  of  a  demon ;' — and,  if  she  be  present,  it  must  be 
added,  '  Thou  seest  how  she  has  come  in  here,  with  thy 
little  ones,  too  proud  to  kneel  before  thee.  Thou 
knowest  that  she  has  come  in  here  on  purpose  to  mock 
thee,  and    insult  thee  to  thy  face.'     After   completing 

*  "  Delineation  of  the  characteristic  features  of  a  revival  of  reli- 
gion in  Troy,  in  1826  and  1827."  By  J.  Brockway,  p.  54,  note. 


228  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

this  description ;  which,  by  the  by,  was  often  drawn 
out  far  beyond  what  I  have  here  quoted,  then  might 
follow  the  petition  or  imprecation, — '  Now,  Lord  God 
Almighty  !  come  down  upon  this  enemy  of  thine ;  break 
in  upon  her ;  break  her  down,  O  Lord,  break  her  down.' 
(This  could  not  be  too  often  repeated.)  '  Break  in  upon 
her.  And  if  thou  hast  one  thunderbolt  in  store,  heavier 
than  another,  come,  God  Almighty,  and  break  it  over 
her  head.     Break  her  down.     Crush   her  at  thy  feet. 

sv     Slay  her  before  thee.' " 

''  But,  in  case  the  subjects  be  males  ;  (for,  from  six  to 

*  twelve  names  were  frequently  introduced  in  the  same 
prayer,)  then  the  description  and  petition  must  vary 
with  circumstances  ;  as,  '  O  Lord,  thou  knowest  he  is  a 
hardened  wretch.  Thou  seest  how  he  has  raised  his 
crest  against  thee.  Thou  knowest.  Lord,  how  vile  his 
heart  is ;  and  how  nothing  is  wanting  to  make  him  a 
perfect  devil,  but  for  thee  to  strip  the  covering  of  his 
heart.  Now,  Lord,  don't  let  him  boast  himself  against 
thee ;  but  draw  thy  sword  and  come  down  upon  him. 
Drive  it  through  his  heart,  and  let  him  bleed  at  thy 

.^  feet ;  that  thine  enemies  may  see  it  and  be  afraid.' 
^  "  This,"  says  Dr.  Brock  way,  an  intelligent  and  candid 
eye-witness,  "  is  a  fair,  though  faint,  specimen  of  the 
kind  of  praying  which  has  been  so  abundant  in  Troy. 
I  say,  a  faint  specimen ;  because,  to  render  it  any  way 
complete,  it  should  be  accomj^anied  with  loud  groans, 
and  with  all  that  kind  of  action  wliich  denotes  extreme 
distress.  It  is  a  /mV  specimen,  because  I  have  not  in- 
troduced a  single  expression  but  what  has  been  common ; 
and  many  of  them  have  been  introduced  more  than 
twenty  times  in  a  single  prayer  ;  besides  the  addition  of 


PEACTICAL   PELAGIANISM.  229 

a  long  similar  list,  to  fill  out  a  prayer  of  half  or  three- 
quarters  of  an  hour.'^* 

This  was  particularity  in  prayer;  and  prayer  that 
was  not  particular  was  of  no  value.  This  was  fervency, 
and  the  admonition  was  familiar, — "Don't  let  us  have 
any  cold  prayers/'  This  was  telling  the  truth  about 
j)eople ;  and,  said  Dr.  Beman,  when  expostulated  with, 
about  it, — "  Ah,  well !  we  ought  to  pray  the  truth  about 
folks.  People  are  too  apt,  when  they  pray  for  individ- 
uals, not  to  tell  God  the  truth  about  them.  They  will 
call  them  the  servants  of  God ;  when,  in  fact,  they  are 
the  servants  of  the  devil.     We  ought  to  pray  the  truth 

about  folks. "t 

A  just  conception  of  this  part  of  the  system,  however,^ 
will  not  be  had,  until  we  include  in  it  the  custom  of  ten 
or  twelve  in  succession  uttering  these  pretended  prayers, 
without  a  word  besides  being  said,  read,  or  sung ;  and 
several  praying  at  the  same  time,  whilst,  perhaps,  others 
were  exhorting  the  impenitent  to  "  submit  to  God,'' 
while  the  prayers  were  being  made  for  them.  Add  to 
this,  the  promiscuous  praying  of  women,  in  these  as-  , 
semblies, — a  measure  eminently  adapted  to  "  arrest  at- 
tention," and  create  excitement.  It  was  admitted,  by 
some,  to  be  wrong  for  women  to  pray  in  public.  But, 
in  mixed  social  meetings,  it  was  altogether  allowable, 
although  fifty  to  a  hundred  persons  might  be  present. 

The  "  prayer  of  faith"  filled  an  important  place  iu 
the  system.  If  they  would  only  believe,  they  might 
have  anything  they  chose  to  ask  of  God,  and  all  other 
prayer  was  held  up  as  an  abomination  to  him. 

As  it  was  commonly  difficult,  at  first,  to  find,  in  any 

*  Brockway,  p.  23.  f  Ibid.,  p.  57. 

20 


230  HISTORY   OF   THE   isEW   SCHOOL. 

community,  a  sufficient  number  of  persons,  qualified  to 
carry  on  the  machinery  of  this  system,  the  evangelist . 
was  usually  accompanied  by  several  experts,  who  were 
represented  as  full  of  the  Holy  Ghost.  These  and  the 
evangelist  were  "the  holy  band,"  whose  business  it 
was,  by  any  means,  to  create  and  keep  up  an  excitement, 
and,  especially  to  take  charge  of  the  prayer-meetings, 
and  the  inquiry-room ;  from  which,  ordinarily,  all  others 
were  excluded.  The  pastor  was  usually  admitted  an 
honorary,  though  subordinate,  member  of  the  band. 
One  conspicuous  trait  characteristic  of  the  band,  was 
the  indulgence  of  a  spirit  of  the  most  arrogant  pride 
and  self-righteousness,  commonly  exhibited  in  the  de- 
nunciation of  Christians  and  ministers.  "  There  is,  to 
be  sure,"  said  Father  Nash,  addressing  the  people  of  Dr. 
Beman's  church,  in  a  prayer-meeting,  "  There  is  some- 
thing of  a  revival,  in  Troy ;  but  no  thanks  to  any  of  you 
old  professors,  for  it.  No  ! — no  thanks  to  any  of  you. 
You  only  hinder  the  work.  If  you  were  all  removed 
out  of  the  way,  entirely ;  yes,  I  say, — every  one  of  you ; 
if  you  were  all  removed  entirely  out  of  the  city,  and 
out  of  reach,  so  that  your  influence  would  be  out  of 
eight,  the  work  would  go  on  a  great  deal  better.  Yes, 
let  two  or  three  faithful  ministers  come  in  here  from 
abroad,  and  take  the  whole  management  of  the  work, 
it  would  go  much  better.  There  is,  to  be  sure,  some 
of  the  young  converts  who  would  help  some.  Yes,  I 
could  name  one  young  convert,  who  is  worth  more  than 
all  of  you.  Come,  now,  pray,  some  of  you.  But  don^t 
make  any  of  your  cold  prayers." 

Intimately  connected  with  this  trait  was  the  disposi- 
tion to  arrogate  the  gift  of  discerning  spirits,  and  to 


PRACTICAL   PELAGIANISM.  231 

pronounce  all  those,  and  especially  ministers,  wlio  would 
not  give  active  countenance  to  their  proceedings,  to  be 
unconverted  men.  As  such,  thev  were  made  the  sub- 
jects  of  prayer,  in  Avhich  all  the  approved  characteris- 
tics of  particularity,  fervency,  and  "  speaking  the  truth 
to  God,"  respecting  them,  were  liberally  displayed. 

Like  the  prayers,  was  the  preaching  of  this  system. 
Designed  to  excite  and  "break  down"  the  hearers,  it 
was  characterized  by  the  selection  of  the  most  alarming 
themes,  and  the  presentation  of  them  in  the  most  start- 
ling style  and  with  the  use  of  the  most  shocking  im- 
agery.     "  Look  !  look  !"  cries  Mr.  Finney.      "  See  the 
millions  of  wretches,  biting,  and  gnawing  their  tongues, 
as  they  lift  their  scalding  heads,  from  the  burning  lake  ! 
See !  see !  how  they  are  tossed  and  how  they  howl,  as 
the  tempest  beats;   blown  up,   by  the  breath   of  the 
Almighty.     Hear  them  groan,  amidst  the  fiery  billows  ; 
as  they  lasli^  and  fos/t,  and  Zas/i,  their  burning  shores."* 
Particularity  was  cultivated  in  preaching,  as  well  as 
in  prayer.     Persons  were  described  in  such  a  manner  as 
to  leave  no  room  to  doubt  who  were  intended ;  perhaps, 
with  the  eye  fixed  upon  them,  or  the  finger  marking 
them,  and  the  exclamation,  "  Thou  art  the  man,"  accom- 
panied with  the  grossest  vituperations  and  impassioned 
threatenings  of  hell,  already  exemplified. 

Let  us  suppose  this  system  of  means  in  full  operation. 
The  report  goes  abroad  that  the  man  who  has  been  so 
wonderfully  blessed,  in  the  conversion  of  souls,  has 
come ;  and  that  a  great  work  of  the  Spirit  has  begun. 
Believers  hear  it  with  joy,  and  crowd  to  the  house  of 
God.     The  unconverted  throng  the  assembly,  influenced 

.  •^  Brockway,  p.  40. 


232  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEAV   SCHOOL. 

by  curiosity  or  hope.  After  a  sufficient  amount  of  the 
various  exciting  agencies  has  been  employed,  a  call  is 
made  for  sinners  to  come  to  the  anxious  seat ;  and  the 
assurance  is  pressed  upon  them  that  now,  and  by  this 
step,  they  must  decide,  for  or  against  the  claims  of  God. 
The  excited  throng  rush  to  the  ap23ointed  seats.  Father 
Nash,  or  some  other  skilled  in  "  fervent  prayer,"  is 
called  to  lead ;  and  the  anxious  are  assured  that  it  is 
for  them,  now,  if  they  choose,  to  make  themselves  new 
hearts ;  that  is,  to  elect  the  Saviour  to  be  Governor  of 
the  universe ;  and  that  they  must  do  it,  while  the  prayer 
is  being  ofi^ered.  The  prayer  is  uttered,  amid  groans 
and  cries ;  whilst  the  anxious,  it  may  be,  are  personally 
addressed  by  parents  or  friends,  or  by  one  of  the  "  holy 
band."  At  the  close  of  the  prayer,  those  who  have 
^'  submitted  to  God"  are  called  to  rise,  or  retire  to  the 
conference-room.  A  number  respond.  The  same  ]>ro- 
cess  is  renewed,  again  and  again,  until  the  night  is  far 
spent,  and  the  morning  hours  are  encroached  upon. 
This  course  is  continued,  night  after  night,  for  weeks, 
or  even  months ;  as  long  as  material  remains,  to  be  ope- 
rated upon,  or  the  susceptibilities  to  excitement  continue. 
At  first,  a  judicious  pastor  and  intelligent  Christians 
may  be  startled,  and  alarmed.  But  souls  are  at  stake. 
The  revivalist  has  a  reputation  and  experience,  in  which 
they  fondly  confide ;  and,  soon,  the  power  of  effectual 
resistance  is  gone.  The  minister  is  ''  broken  down," 
and  his  unwilling  sanction  gives  an  additional  impulse 
to  the  revivalist's  fame.  Soon  the  papers  report  a 
great  revival.  Plundreds  of  converts  are  announced. 
Among  them  are  numbered  all  who,  by  rising,  or  other- 
wise, in  response  to  the  oft-repeated  calls,  have  professed 


PRACTICAL   PELAGIANISM.  233 

themselves  to  have  enlisted  on  the  Lord's  side.  The 
evangelist  goes  his  way,  crowned  with  honor,  and  laden 
with  gifts,  to  re-enact  similar  scenes,  on  some  other 
stage. 

But,  w^hat  has  been  the  result  upon  the  Church? 
Unconverted  persons,  who  were  of  a  susceptible  dispo- 
sition and  tender  conscience,  have  been  wrought  up  to 
an  intense  state  of  excitement.  This,  according  to  a 
well-known  law  of  the  human  mind,  which  refuses, 
permanently,  to  sustain  excessive  emotion,  of  any  kind, 
has  suddenly  given  place  to  apathy.  The  subject  of  it 
is  ^^  broken  down/^  and  a  transition  is  realized,  which  is 
supposed  to  be  a  change  of  heart.  Others,  more  self- 
confident,  have  accepted  the  terms  of  salvation,  pre- 
sented to  them ;  by  electing  Jesus  as  King,  and  deter- 
mining, henceforward,  to  be  on  his  side.  They  have 
"  made  themselves  new  hearts."  Thus,  the  impenitent 
are  deceived.  The  Church  is  filled  with  false  profess- 
ors. The  moral  susceptibilities  of  all  are  blunted  and 
deadened, — multitudes  awake  out  of  the  dream,  to  find 
themselves  deceived,  and  to  pronounce  all  religion  a 
sham  and  a  fraud.  Others  are  the  easy  prey  of  the 
wildest  fanatical  impostures.  The  cause  of  true  religion 
is  prostrate ;  and  the  Church  is  doomed  to  years  of  bar- 
renness and  desolation ;  relieved,  it  may  be,  at  long  in- 
tervals, by  spasms  of  activity,  under  the  galvanism  of 
similar  appliances. 

Such  were  the  fruits,  widely  realized  in  AVestern  ^N^ew 
York,  from  the  New  Haven  theology.  They  were  its 
legitimate  and  proper  results.  The  good  taste,  common 
sense,  and  piety,  of  many  of  the  disciples  of  that 
school,  may  revolt  from  these  exhibitions,  and  pause 

20* 


234  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

before  adopting  them,  in  their  full  development.  But 
the  practical  system  of  Finney,  Burchard,  Myrick,  and 
their  compeers,  was  deduced,  from  the  theology  of  New 
Haven,  by  a  logic,  which  no  ingenuity  can  evade. 

Dr.  Beecher  joined,  at  first,  with  Nettleton  and  others 
in  expostulations  to  Messrs.  Beman,  Finney,  and  the 
patrons  of  their  measures.  "  He  has  set  himself  up," 
said  Dr.  Beman,  "  to  oppose  revivals,  for  fear  they  were 
getting  unpopular."  Whatever  the  motives.  Dr. 
Beecher  afterward  found  reason  to  change  his  position, 
and  give  the  cordial  sanction  of  his  presence  and  voice 
to  the  preaching  and  measures  of  Mr.  Finney;  when 
laboring  in  Boston,  at  a  later  date. 

The  errors  of  the  New  Divinity  may,  to  many,  seem 
of  no  practical  importance ;  but  the  results  following 
are,  the  ruin  of  souls,  and  the  desolation  of  the 
churches. 


CHAPTER  XV. 

THE   HOPKINSIAN   CONTEOVEKSY. 

Hopkinsianisra  in  New  York  and  Philadelphia— Ely's  "  Contrast" — 
The  Young  Men's  Missionary  Society  of  New  York — Case  of  Mr. 
Cox — Division  of  the  Society — The  Triangle — Synod  of  Philadel- 
phia's Pastoral  letter — Case  of  Kev.  William  Gray — Whelpley's 
letter  to  two  Jersey  divines — Princeton  suspected  of  "  Triangular 
theology" — The  Assembly  of  1817 — Moderatism — Congregational 
delegates  voting  in  the  Assembly — The  African  Institution,  and  the 
negotiations  respecting  it — The  "  New  Test"  discussion. 

The  intimate  relations  existing  between  the  Presby- 
terian cburclies  and  those  of  New  England,  precluded 
the  possibility  that  the  former  could  fail  to  be  more  or 
less  affected  by  the  radical  changes  which  Avere  taking 
place  in  the  doctrinal  principles  of  the  other.  The 
earliest  indications  of  the  coming  troubles,  occurred  in 
New  York.  In  that  city,  several  ministers  from  New 
England,  were  settled,  in  connection  with  the  Presby- 
terian Church.  These  brethren,  generally,  held  some 
phase  of  the  Edwardean,  or  Hopkinsian  theology. 
Several  individuals,  of  similar  sentiments,  belonged  to 
the  Presbytery  of  Philadelphia.  None  of  these  breth- 
ren couM  have  gained  admission  into  the  Presbyterian 
Church,  but  for  the  relaxation,  Avhich  the  beginning  of 
the  present  century  witnessed  in  the  strictness  of  its 

235 


236  HISTORY  OF  THE  NEW  SCHOOL. 

principles, — a  relaxation  of  which  the  Plan  of  Union 
was  the  principal  phenomenon.  It  was  embarrassing 
and  impracticable,  after  the  adoption  of  that  Plan, 
consistently  to  reject  ministers  from  the  East,  on  account 
of  the  peculiar  doctrines  which  began  by  degrees,  to  be 
there  prevalent.  A  footing  was  thus,  for  the  first  time, 
gained  for  ^'  the  substance  of  doctrine,'^ — the  hand- 
maiden of  defection,  always. 

The  propagation  of  the  New  England  theology,  in 
the  churches  of  the  two  chief  cities  of  the  nation, 
excited  much  uneasiness.  This  was  greatly  increased, 
in  1811,  by  the  publication  of  Ely's  Contrast.*  The 
author,  the  Rev.  Ezra  Stiles  Ely,  a  native  of  New 
England,  and  a  recent  convert  from  the  Hopkinsian 
system,  was,  at  the  time  of  this  publication,  stated 
preacher  to  the  hospital  and  almshouse,  in  New  York ; 
a  useful  and  indefatigable  laborer  among  the  poor  and 
vicious  in  the  city.  At  the  suggestion  of  several  of 
his  brethren,  he,  in  this  work,  exhibited,  in  opposite 
columns,  the  doctrines  of  Calvin,  and  the  orthodox 
standards,  iu  contrast  Avith  the  teachings  -  of  Hopkins 
and  his  school. 

The  publication  of  the  Contrast  excited  a  hostility 
against  the  author,  among  the  Hopkinsians  of  the  two 
cities ;  which  his  vanity  and  imprudence  did  not  tend 
to  conciliate.  Calls  being  addressed  to  him,  from 
churches  in  each  city,  the  Hopkinsian  members  of  the 
Presbyteries  made  pertinacious  opposition  to  his  settle- 
ment. They  proceeded  to  the  length  of  a  prosecution 
for   ftdsehood,  conducted   in   the   Presbytery   of   New 

*  A  Contrast  between  Calvinism  and  Hopkinsianism,  by  Ezra  Stiles 
Ely,  A.  M.     New  York,  1811,  pp.  280,  8vo. 


THE    HOPKIXSIAN   CONTROVERSY.  237 

Yorkj  with  great  violence  and  zeal.  The  case,  how- 
ever, broke  down,  in  the  midst.  Tlie  members,  by 
whom  it  had  been  urged,  were  indebted  to  the  magnan- 
imity of  Mr.  Ely,  for  exemption  from  the  just  conse- 
quences of  their  rashness  and  violence.  And  he  was, 
at  length,  settled  in  Philadelphia,  where  he  was  des- 
tined, at  a  later  day,  to  take  so  consj)icuous  a  part  in 
forwarding  the  plans  of  the  very  l>arty,  from  whose 
early  hostility  he  had  so  hardly  escaped. 

The  uneasiness,  in  New  York,  of  which  the  case  of 
Mr.  Ely  was  an  incident,  broke  out  into  open  contro- 
versy and  division,  in  1816,  in  the  committee  room  of 
the  Young  Men's  Missionary  Society  of  New  York. 
This  society  was  devoted  to  the  prosecution  of  domestic 
missions,  and  was  composed  of  members  of  the  Presby- 
terian, Associate  Reformed,  and  Eeformed  Dutch 
Churches.  Its  constitution  embodied  a  Calvinistic 
creed,  in  conformity  with  which  the  sentiments  of  its 
missionaries  were  required  to  be. 

In  November,  1816,  the  Pev.  Samuel  H.  Cox,  a 
licentiate  of  the  Presbytery  of  New  York,  was  proposed 
to  the  Board  of  Directors,  as  a  missionary  under  its 
care.  His  doctrinal  views  w^ere  questionable;  and  the 
committee  on  missions  refused  to  report  him  to  the 
Board  of  Directors,  without  further  evidence  of  his 
soundness.  The  Pev.  Gardiner  Spring  was  Mr.  Cox^s 
theological  instructor,  and  was  chairman  of  the  com- 
mittee. He  refused  to  allow  an  examination  of  the 
candidate,  but  offered  himself  as  a  substitute.  The 
committee,  at  length,  consented  to  this  curious  arrange- 
ment. Three  hours  were  spent  in  the  vicarious  exam- 
ination of  Mr.  Cox,  in  the  person  of  Mr.  Spring.     The 


238  HISTORY   OF   THE    NEW   SCHOOL. 

result  was  unsatisfactoiy.  The  committee,  therefore, 
declined  to  recommend  Mr.  Cox  to  the  Directors. 

An  attempt  was  then  made,  in  the  Board,  to  have  the 
candidate  appointed,  notwithstanding  the  unfavorable 
report  of  the  committee.  The  motion  was  rejected,  by 
a  vote  of  six  to  twelve.  The  annual  meeting  was  at 
hand.  The  conflict  was  transferred  to  that  field.  The 
Hopkinsian  party  attempted,  unsuccessfully  to  displace 
the  Calvinistic  Directors  and  fill  their  places  with 
others,  of  more  congenial  sentiments.  Failing  in  this, 
an  attempt  was  next  made  to  obtain  such  action  from 
the  society  as  would  prevent  the  exclusion  of  future 
candidates,  upon  the  ground  of  Hopkinsian  sentiments. 
The  discussion  was  protracted  through  several  evenings. 
The  merits  of  the  Hopkinsian  theology  were  largely 
discussed ;  and  as  the  result,  the  society,  by  a  vote  of 
one  hundred  and  eighty-two  to  ninetj^-one,  sustained 
the  Directors,  and  refused  to  modify  the  policy  adopted. 
The  minority  immediately  withdrew,  and  organized 
the  New  York  Evangelical  Missionary  Society  of 
Young  Men. 

Whilst  these  proceedings  were  in  progress,  the  public 
excitement  was  aggravated,  by  the  publication  of  a 
series  of  articles,  under  the  designation  of  "  The  Tri- 
angle.'^ These  appeared  in  successive  numbers,  in 
pamphlet  form,  over  the  signature  of  "  Investigator." 
They  were  composed  of  caricatures  of  the  leading  doc- 
trines of  the  Confession,  especially  on  Original  Sin, 
Inability,  and  the  Atonement,  the  three  points  of  the 
Calvinistic  Triangle;  together  with  violent  philippics 
against  the  friends  of  orthodoxy,  and  pleas  for  ^^  toler- 
ance,'' and  "  free  inquiry,"  on  doctrinal  subjects.     "  Or- 


THE    HOPKINSIAN   CONTEOYERSY.  239 

tliodoxy"  was  held  up  to  utter  contempt,  whilst  Hop- 
kinsianism  was  exhibited  as  peculiarly  congenial  to  the 
spirit  of  revivals,  and  the  dissemination  of  the  gospel. 
The  writer  held  a  racy  pen ;  and  his  pieces  were  admir- 
ably calculated  to  catch  the  popular  ear,  to  which  and 
all  its  prejudices  he  directly  addressed  himself.  The 
author  was  the  Rev.  Samuel  Whelpley,  then  residing 
with  his  son,  the  Rev.  Philip  M.  Whelpley,  the  suc- 
cessor of  Doctor  Miller,  in  the  First  Church,  New 
York.* 

^^  The  sentiments,"  says  this  writer,  "  usually  denomi- 
nated Hopkinsian,  were  never  considered  as  heresy,  by 
the  founders  of  the  Presbyterian  Church  in  America, 
nor  by  the  wisest  and  ablest  divines  who  differed  with 
them,  in  any  subsequent  period,  in  Europe  or  America. 
Nothing  Avas  ever  further  from  their  thoughts  than  any 
idea  of  making  them  at  all  a  breaking  point,  in  church 
communion  and  fellowship.  Candidates  for  the  minis- 
try were  never  impeded  in  their  progress,  or  censured, 
for  holding  them.  Ordination  or  licensure  was  never 
refused  to  a  man  who  professed  them ;  nor  was  any  bar 
laid  in  the  way  of  his  acceding  to  any  vacant  church, 
which  had  given  him  a  call.^f 

Addressing  himself  to  certain  Hopkinsian  Doctors  in 
New  Jersey,  he  tells  them, — "  That  truth,"  by  which 
he  means  Hopkinsianism,  ^'  has  made  progress  in  this 
country,  is  as  evident  as  it  is  that  God  has  poured  out 
his  Spirit  on  his  churches, — is  as  evident  as  it  is  that 
religious  freedom  and  toleration  have  here  first  showered 

*  The  numbers  of  "  The  Triangle/'  were  collected  into  a  volume 
and  published,  in  1832,  pp.  396,  8vo. 
t  Whelpley's  Triangle,  p.  160. 


240  HISTORY    OF    THE   XEW   SCHOOL. 

their  blessings  on  mankind.  The  same  spirit  is  opposed 
to  both,  and  is  equally  free  and  bold  to  declare  the 
latter  profane  licentiousness,  and  the  former  error  and 
delusion  and  a  departure  from  '  the  form  of  sound 
words.'  The  sun,  from  a  cloudless  meridian,  is  not 
more  visible,  than,  that  a  powerful  diversion  is  making, 
in  opposition  to  both;  and  is  beginning  to  arm  itself, 
not  with  evidence,  argument,  or  moral  suasion, — not  by 
addressing  the  understandings  and  consciences  of  men,— 
but  with  varied  forms  of  personal  influence,  extensive 
interests,  and  ecclesiastical  censures, — with  pecuniary 
funds,  establishments,  and  institutions.  And  this  in- 
cessant harping  on  the  Reformers,  and  doctrines  of  the 
Reformation, — this  leaning  toward  the  established 
churches  in  Europe,  [he  means  the  Church  of  Scotland,] 
which  are  no  models  for  us,  but  bringing  round-  a 
sweep  of  influence,  and  setting  up,  as  a  mark,  a  kind 
of  ^  unity  of  the  faith,'  which  is  for  ever  to  exterminate 
all  freedom  of  opinion  and  inquiry,  and  eventually  all 
liberty  of  conscience.  .  .  .  And,  gentlemen,  may 
Heaven  long  defend  us  from  the  yoke  of  the  faith  worn 
by  the  Protestant  churches  of  Europe,  even  the  best  of 
them."* 

In  closing,  he  appeals  to  his  corres^^ondents, — ^^  Your 
talents,  your  long  experience,  your  conspicuous  stations, 
your  standing  in  the  public  confidence,  and  your  correct 
sentiments,  are  pledges  which  the  Church  holds,  that 
your  exertions  in  the  cause  of  truth  will  be  equally 
distinguished  and  decided. "f 

The  parties  here  addressed  appear  to  have  been  the 
Rev.  Drs.  Richards  and  Grifiin.  They  were  not  lieed- 
*  The  Triangle,  p.  250.  f  Ibid.,  p.  255. 


THE   HOPKIXSIAN   CONTPvOYERSY.  241 

less  of  the  admonition  that  the  advocates  of  adherence 
to  "  the  form  of  sound  words"  were  ^^  arming  themselves 
with  the  means  and  influences  of  institutions ;"  as  the 
subsequent  history  will  show. 

Whilst  New  York  was  agitated  with  this  discussion, 
other  sections  of  the  Church  began  to  feel  the  ground- 
swell  of  the  coming  storm.  In  the  Synod  of  Philadel- 
phia, at  its  meeting,  in  the  fall  of  1816,  a  pastoral  letter, 
written  by  Mr.  Ely,  was  adopted.  In  this  paper,  it 
was  stated  that  "all  the  Presbyteries  are  more  than 
commonly  alive  to  the  importance  of  contending  earnestly 
for  the  faith  once  delivered  to  the  saints,  and  of  resist- 
ing the  introduction  of  Arian,  Sociuian,  Arminian,  and 
Hopkinsian  heresies,  wliich  are  some  of  the  means  by 
which  the  enemy  of  souls  would,  if  possible,  deceive  the 
very  elect."  A  warning  was  uttered  against  "  the  dis- 
position of  many  good  men  to  cry,  ^  Peace  !'  when  there 
is  no  peace."  Presbyteries  were  admonished  "to  be 
strict  in  the  examination  of  candidates  for  licensure  or 
ordination,  npon  the  subject  of  those  delusions  of  the 
present  age,  which  seem  to  be  a  combination  of  most  of 
the  innovations,  made  upon  Christian  doctrine,  in  former 
times.  May  the  time  never  come,  in  which  our  ecclesi- 
astical courts  shall  determine  that  Hopkinsianism  and 
the  doctrines  of  the  Confession  of  Faith  are  the  same 
thing."  The  elders  were  particularly  exhorted  to  be- 
ware of  those  w4io  have  made  such  "  pretended  discov- 
eries in  Christian  theology,  as  require  an  abandonment 
of  the  ^form  of  sound  words,'  contained  in  our  excellent 
Confession." 

The  Pastoral  also  touched  upon  another  topic: — 
"  Three  or  four  of  our  churches  have  experienced  what 

21 


242  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

is  commonly  called,  a  revival  of  religion  ;  and,  to  them, 
accessions  of  communicants  have  been  numerous.  But, 
in  many  other  congregations,  a  gradual,  but  almost  con- 
stant, multiplication  of  the  professed  friends  of  Zion, 
reminds  us,  that,  if  the  thunder-storm  in  summer  ex- 
cites the  most  attention,  it  is  the  continued  blessing  from 
the  clouds  which  replenishes  the  springs,  and  makes  glad 
the  harvest  of  the  husbandman.  For  the  many,  who 
are  united  in  a  short  time,  and  for  many  who  are  gradu- 
ally gathered  to  Christ,  not  by  the  great  and  strong 
wind,  that  rends  the  mountains,  nor  by  the  earthquake, 
but  by  the  still  small  voice,  which  cometh  not  with 
observation,  we  would  give  our  Redeemer  tlianks ;  and 
desire  the  churches  to  bless  him,  no  less,  for  the  daily 
dew,  than  for  the  latter  and  the  early  rain.''* 

From  the  language  of  this  last  paragraph,  occasion 
was  most  unjustly  taken  to  stigmatize  the  opposers  of 
Hopkinsian  errors,  as  enemies  of  revivals ;  advocates  of 
"dead  orthodoxy." 

In  the  Synod  of  New  York  and  New  Jersey,  at  the 
same  date,  the  subject  came  up,  in  a  d liferent  form.  A 
majority  of  the  congregation  of  Goodwill,  in  the  Pres- 
bytery of  Hudson,  had  voted  a  call  to  the  Rev.  William 
Gray,  a  minister  of  Hopkinsian  sentiments ;  to  whom, 
for  that  reason,  a  strong  minority  were  opposed.  The 
Presbytery  refused  to  put  the  call  into  his  hands ; 
whereupon  the  congregation  appealed  to  the  Synod; 
and  by  it  the  decision  of  the  Presbytery  was  reversed. 
Against  this  decision.  Dr.  Alexander  and  others  entered 
a  protest,  and  an  appeal  was  taken,  by  the  Presbytery, 
to  the  General  Assembly. 

*  Digest,  p.  656. 


THE    HOPKTNSIAN   CONTROVERSY.  243 

These  occurrences  did  not  escape  the  vigilance  of  the 
Hopkinsian  party,  in  New  York.  The  relation  of  Dr. 
Alexander  to  the  Theological  Seminary,  and  the  pro- 
bable attitude  of  that  institution  toward  their  theol- 
ogy, was  an  occasion  of  special  anxiety  and  apprehen-  ^ 
sion.  Whelpley  rang  out,  from  his  "  Triangle,"  the 
shrill  notes  of  alarm.  In  the  letter  to  Drs.  Richards 
and  Griffin,  which  we  have  already  cited,  he  entered 
fully  into  the  subject. 

He  tells  these  gentlemen  that,  "  for  several  years  past, 
there  has  been,  in  various  places,  an  increasing  opposition 
to  the  strain  of  doctrine  and  sentiments  commonly 
denominated,  Hopkinsian.  At  the  present  time,  or 
within  a  few  months,  ground  has  been  taken,  on  that 
subject,  at  which  all  those  who  generally  adhere  to  that 
doctrine,  are  greatly  alarmed  and  shocked.  Direct  in- 
formation has  been  given  against  several  young  men, 
holding  these  sentiments ;  with  a  view  to  impede  their 
settlement,  and  prevent  their  preaching  in  certain  places. 
One  has  been  informally  cited  to  appear  before  his 
Presbytery,  though  at  a  gi'eat  distance ;  to  answer  to  the 
charge  of  preaching  heresy.  And  I  need  only  say,  that 
the  sentiments  he  preached  are  such  as  you,  gentlemen, 
have  been  preaching  and  maintaining  for  many  years  ; 
and  that,  with  power  and  success.  A  whole  Synod  has 
made  a  firm  stand,  and  boldly,  and  expressly  condemned 
Hopkinsianism,  as  a  heresy,  and  that  whereby  ^  the 
enemy  of  souls  would,  if  it  were  possible,  deceive  the  very 
elect/  Corresponding  with  these  particular  acts,  a 
combined  and  extensive  influence  has  been  used,  and  is 
using,  to  give  the  public  mind  a  general  strain  of  ab- 


244  HISTORY    OF    THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

horrence  and  indignation  against  that  strain  of  doc- 
trine.* .... 

"  'No,  gentlemen,  the  opposition  is  aimed  at  the  grand 
pillars  of  that  noble  and  imperishable  frame  of  doctrine 
which  yon  have  labored,  through  all  your  years,  to  es- 
tablish and    propagate It  is  for  you,  reverend 

and  beloved  sirs,  to  consider,  whether  the  evil  has  not 
grown  to  be  of  sufficient  magnitude,  and  induced  a  state 
of  things  to  require  some  remedy. f  .... 

^'  Perhaps  the  arrival  and  establishment  of  ministers 
from  these  churches,  now  called  heretics,  will  no  longer 
be  thought  necessary  or  consistent  with  Presbyterian 
policy.  Perhaps  it  will  be  said  that  we  now  have  an 
established  ministerial  Seminary ;  therefore  it  is  time 
that  the  streams  from  that  Northern  fountain  were  ^ried 
up.''  .... 

^^  Are  we,  gentlemen,  to  understand  that  young  men, 
educated  for  the  Church  in  that  Seminary  are  to  be  im- 
bued in  this  intolerance  of  spirit, — are  to  be  sent  forth 
to  preach  down  Hopkinsian  heresy  ?"J  He  supposes 
the  triumph  in  the  Church  of  the  "  triangular  theology,'' 
reducing  every  minister  and  licentiate  to  a  "  three-square 
shape ;"  and  then  depicts  the  deplorable  consequences ; 
and  "  as  for  our  Theological  Seminary,  it  will  be  in  the 
hands  of  men  who  will  imbue,  if  possible,  every  can- 
didate whom  they  shall  instruct  and  send  forth,  in  a 
deep  abhorrence  of  the  '  Hopkinsian  heresy ;'  and 
every  one  will  go  forth  under  a  full  impression  that  he 
must  beat  down  the  odious  doctrine  of  disinterested 
benevolence,  and  erect  selfishness  on  its  ruins." § 

*  The  Triangle,  p.  232.  f  Ibid.,  p.  233. 

J  Ibid.,  p.  235.  g  Ibid.,  p.  244. 


THE   HOPKINSIAN   CONTEOVEESY.  245 

1 

The  case  of  Mr.  Gray  is  then  taken  up,  and  its  his- 
tory given,  till  the  decision  of  the  Synod.  But  ^^  what 
do  we  see  next?  A  large  body  of  the  Synod,  headed 
by  the  very  man  [Dr.  Alexander]  whom  the  General 
Assembly  has  set  at  the  head  of  the  Theological  Semi- 
nary, and,  what  is  remarkable,  the  man  who  endeavored 
to  distinguish  himself  as  a  friend  to  republican  princi- 
ples and  the  rights  of  mankind,  rose  and  entered  their 
solemn  protest  against  this  decision  of  the  Synod  ;  and 
encouraged  the  Presbytery  to  appeal  to  the  General 
Assembly."* 

After  discussing  largely  the  embarrassments  which 
threaten  to  encounter  licentiates  and  ministers,  of  Hop- 
kinsian  sentiments,  he  again  returns  to  the  Semi- 
nary : — 

"  But  motives  prior  to  all  these  will  be  effectually 
laid  in  the  way  of  young  men  looking  toward  the 
ministry.  They  must  go  to  a  Theological  Seminary ; 
and,  to  the  honor  of  that  Seminary  be  it  spoken,  they 
have  not  expelled,  as  yet,  for  holding  correct  senti- 
ments; but,  from  the  appearance  of  things,  in  iwogyessu, 
that  ev^ent  is  soon  to  be  expected.  The  principal  part, 
nay,  almost  all  who  receive  their  education  there,  come 
out  thoroughly  and  finishedly  triangular.  They  go 
forth  and  preach  all  the  points  of  impittafion,  contended 
for  by  any  one  ; — a  limited  atonement ; — know  nothing 
about  moral  inability,  and  count  that  important  distinc- 
tion, as  a  most  promising  young  divine  of  this  city 
lately  declared,  before  the  Ncav  York  Presbytery,  noth- 
ing but  liodge  podge ; — make  all  religion  to  consist  in 
faith,  a  mystical  principle,  above  all  creature  perfection 

*  The  Triangle,  p.  245. 
21  * 


246  HISTOKY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

or  conception ; — disinterested  benevolence  a  scarecrow, 
and  a  little  selfishness  a  very  good  thing  : — that  people 
must,  by  no  means,  be  willing  to  be  damned,  in  order 
that  they  may  be  saved ; — that  moral  virtue  is  quite  an 
Old  Testament,  Jewish  economy,  Arminian  affair,  and 
out  of  date ; — metaphysics,  ugly  things : — that  people 
must  love  Christ,  because  he  is  about  to  save  them,  and 
surely,  they  would  be  very  ungrateful  if  they  did  not ; — 
that  the  non-elect  Avill  be  condemned  for  not  believing 
that  Christ  died  for  them,  because  they  do  not  know 
but  that  he  did  die  for  them.  They  never  fail  to  impress 
the  hearer  that  he  is,  in  every  sense,  unable  to  do  his 
duty;  yet  will  be  condemned  for  not  doing  it; — that  he 
ought  to  believe  in  Christ,  though  faith  is  a  divine 
principle  implanted ;  and  can  be  given  to  none  but 
those  whose  debt  to  justice  Christ  has  paid ; — that 
men  are  moral  agents  to  do  wrong,  but  not  to  do 
right ;  and  in  a  word,  that  sinners  are  not  in  a  state  of 
probation."* 

These  extracts  not  only  illustrate  the  doctrinal  views 
of  the  Hopkinsian  party,  but  indicate  tlie  considerations 
which  determined  their  attitude  toward  the  institutions 
of  our  Church. 

In  the  Assembly  of  1817,  the  appeal,  in  Mr.  Gray^s 
case,  came  up  and  was  sustained,  and  tlie  Presbytery 
vindicated  in  its  refusal  to  sanction  the  call. 

The  same  body,  however,  in  its  review  of  the  records 
of  the  Synod  of  Philadelphia,  took  exception  to  the 
Pastoral  letter.  The  Pev.  Dr.  Miller,  of  Princeton 
Seminary,  was  chairman  of  the  committee.  He  had 
been  pastor  of  the  First  Church,  in  New  York,  at  the 

*  The  Triangle,  p.  252: 


THE   HOPKIXSIAN   CONTROVERSY.  247 

time  of  the  publication  of  Ely^s  Contrast.  The  prince 
of  peace  men, — he  was  much  displeased  with  that  pro- 
duction, and  annoyed  at  the  excitement  which  it  occa- 
sioned in  that  city.  He  was  not  disposed,  therefore, 
to  regard  in  a  favorable  light,  the  measures  of  the  same 
person,  to  enlist  so  respectable  a  body  as  the  Synod  of 
Philadelphia,  in  active  resistance  to  innovation.  The 
threatening  attitude  of  the  Hopkinsians  respecting  the 
seminary  at  Princeton  had  also,  no  doubt,  its  influence 
in  determining  his  position  at  this  time. 

He,  therefore,  reported  that  the  book  be  approved, 
"  excepting  certain  parts  of  a  pastoral  letter,  commen- 
cing on  page  494,  and  a  resolution  on  page  493,  which 
enjoins  on  the  several  Presbyteries  belonging  to  the 
Synod  to  call  to  an  account  all  such  ministers  as  may 
be  suspected  to  embrace  any  of  the  opinions  usually 
called  Hopkinsian.  On  these  parts  of  the  records,  the 
Assembly  would  remark,  that  while  they  commend  the 
zeal  of  the  Synod,  in  endeavoring  to  promote  a  strict 
conformity  to  our  public  standards, — a  conformity  which 
cannot  but  be  viewed  as  of  vital  importance  to  the 
jDurity  and  prosperity  of  the  Church, — the  Assembly 
regret  that  zeal  on  this  subject  should  be  manifested  in 
such  a  manner  as  to  be  offensive  to  other  denomina- 
tions; and,  especially,  to  introduce  a  spirit  of  jealousy 
and  suspicion  against  ministers  in  good  standing,  which 
is  calculated  to  disturb  the  peace  and  harmony  of  our 
ecclesiastical  j  udicatories. 

"  And  whereas  a  passage  in  the  pastoral  letter,  above 
referred  to,  appears  capable  of  being  construed  as 
expressing  an  opinion  unfavorable  to  revivals  of 
religion,  the  Assembly  would  only  observe,  that  they 


248  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

cannot  believe  that  that  venerable  Synod  could  have 
intended  to  express  such  an  opinion."* 

This  remarkable  minute^  very  correctly  exhibits  the 
policy  of  the  Moderates,  who  were,  for  some  years,  the 
dominant  party  in  the  Church, — a  policy  which  had 
wellnigh  been  her  ruin.  "  Strict  conformity  to  our 
public  standards  cannot  but  be  viewed  as  of  vital  im- 
portance to  the  purity  and  prosperity  of  the  Church ;" 
and  zeal  for  it  is  to  be  higlily  commended,  provided  it 
expend  itself  in  good  wishes.  But  if  any  man's  zeal 
should  induce  him  to  do  anything  to  offend  those  who 
were  destroying  this  vital  concern,  he  is  justly  deserving 
of  frowns  and  censure. 

The  report  was  adopted  by  the  Assembly.  Against 
this  action,  two  proteats  were  entered.  Thus  began,  in 
the  General  Assembly,  that  struggle  between  the  prin- 
ciples of  our  standards  and  the  schemes  of  innovators, 
which  terminated  after  twenty  years,  in  the  deliverance 
of  1837. 

It  is  to  be  borne  in  mind,  that,  in  consequence  of  the 
unconstitutional  and  suicidal  2:)olicy,  which  had  been 
adopted  by  the  General  Assembly,  there  were  at  this 
time  present  in  (hat  body, — voting  and  exercising  all 
the  rights  of  rulers  in  our  church,  five  delegates  from 
New  England,  who  had  no  more  right  to  such  a  'pve- 
rogative,  nor  proper  interest  in  the  results,  than  had 
the  bishops  of  the  Methodist  or  Episcopal  Church.  Is 
it  surprising,  that,  with  such  encouragement,  the  scheme 
should  have  been  formed,  and  obstinately  pursued,  for 
nearly  twenty  years,  to  bring  the  Church  fully  under 
Congregational  control? 

*  Minutes,  1789-1820,  p.  653. 


THE   HOPKTXSIAN   CONTROVERSY.  249 

At  the  meeting  of  the  Synod  of  New  York  and  New 
Jersey,  in  October,  1816,  a  jiroposition  was  introduced, 
to  esta])lish  a  school,  to  train  colored  preachers,  for  the 
African  race.  That  remarkable  servant  of  God,  Samuel 
J.  Mills,  was  the  author  of  the  scheme.  A  committee 
was  appointed  to  consider  the  proposition,  upon  the 
report  of  which,  the  overture  was  approved ;  a  system 
of  regulations  was  adopted,  a  plan  formed  for  the 
African  School,  and  a  Board  of  Directors  appointed,  by 
whom  a  school  was  founded. 

In  1818,  the  Board  of  Directors  of  this  school,  by 
order  of  the  Synod,  made  a  proposition  to  the  Synods 
of  Philadelphia  and  Albany  to  join  in  the  management 
of  the  institution.  In  pursuance  of  that  overture, 
commissioners  from  the  two  Synods  met  the  Board,  in 
May,  1819.  The  commissioners  on  behalf  of  the 
Synod  of  Philadelphia  had  been  instructed,  by  that 
body,  to  propose  that  all  persons,  employed  in  giving 
theological  instruction  to  the  pupils  in  the  school,  come 
under  the  engagement  taken  by  the  professors  in  the 
Princeton  Seminary.  That  engagement  is  in  the  fol- 
lowing words,  subscribed  by  the  professor,  on  his  induc- 
tion into  office: —  ■ 

"  In  the  presence  of  God  and  of  the  Directorsx)f  this 
seminary,  I  do,  solemnly,  and  ex  animo,^  adopt,  receive, 
and  subscribe  the  Confession  of  Faith  and  Catechisms 
of  the  Presbyterian  Church  in  the  United  States  of 
America,  as  the  confession  of  my  faith ;  or,  as  a  sum- 
mary and  just  exhibition  of  that  system  of  doctrine 
and  religious  belief  which  is  contained  in  the  Holy 
Scriptures,  and  therein  revealed  by  God  to  man  for  his 

*  From  tlie  heart. 


250  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW   SCPIOOL. 

salvation ;  and  I  do  solemnly,  ex  ammo,  profess  to  re- 
ceive the  Form  of  Government  of  said  Church,  as 
agreeable  to  the  inspired  oracles.  And  I  do  s.olemnly 
promise  and  engage,  not  to  inculcate,  teach,  or  insinuate, 
anything  which  shall  appear  to  me  to  contradict,  or 
contravene,  either  directly,  or  impliedly,  anything 
taught  in  the  said  Confession  of  Faith  or  Catechisms ; 
nor  to  oppose  the  fundamental  principles  of  Presbyterian 
Church  Government,  while  I  shall  continue  a  professor 
in  this  seminary." 

This  provision  of  the  Princeton  plan  was  proposed, 
as  an  article  in  the  plan  of  the  African  School.  Dr. 
Griffin  and  Dr.  Spring,  who  were  members  of  the 
Board,  opposed  the  proposition,  "because,  as  Dr.  Griffin, 
distinctly  avowed,  they  did  not  assent  to  the  whole  of 
the  Presbyterian  Confession  of  Faith,  themselves." 
The  delegation  from  the  Synod  of  Albany  endeavored 
to  mediate  between  the  opposing  views.  At  their  sug- 
gestion the  phrase— "  any  thing  taught," — was  altered 
to  read  — "  any  doctrine  of  faith  taught." 

The  article,  so  amended,  was  adopted,  by  the  com- 
missioners and  Board,  and  upon  that  basis,  a  plan  of 
union  of  the  three  Synods,  in  the  support  and  manage- 
ment of  the  institution,  was  agreed  upon.  This  plan 
was  then  submitted  to  the  Board ;  which  constituted, 
immediately,  for  the  purpose  of  acting  upon  it ;  and 
was  by  it  accepted  and  the  union  thus  consummated. 
At  a  subsequent  meeting,  the  Board  in  violation  of  the 
covenant  thus  made,  rescinded  their  action,  respecting 
the  pledge  of  the  professors,  and  rejected  that  article ; 
of  which  action  they  gave  written  notice  to  the  Synod 
of  Philadelphia. 


THE   HOPKINSIAN  CONTEOVERSY.  251 

The  Synod,  thereupon,  made  record  of  the  facts  and 
resolved  that,  in  view  of  them,  ^^this  Synod  considers 
that  resohition  of  the  Board  as  a  decided  expression  of 
their  feelings  and  views  upon  the  subject, — that  they 
neither  wish  nor  expect  our  co-operation  with  them  in 
the  direction  of  the  school ;  and,  that,  on  this  account, 
the  Synod  do  not  feel  themselves  at  liberty  to  act  in 
the  case;  as  being  shut  out  from  all  co-operation  with 
them,  until  further  communication  be  had  from  that 
Board/^* 

At  its  next  sessions,  in  1819,  the  Synod  of  New  York 
and  New  Jersey  arraigned  the  conduct  of  the  Board,  in 
this  matter.  After  n  warm  discussion,  final  action  was 
postponed  until  the  next  year.  What  was  the  ultimate 
decision,  we  are  not  aware.  The  discussion  elicited, 
from  the  pen  of  Dr.  Griffin,  an  anonymous  pamphlet, 
entitled  "An  Appeal,  on  the  Subject  of  the  New  Test." 
The  test,  to  which  reference  was  had,  consisted  in  the 
following  words,  in  the  Princeton  pledge : — "  I  do 
solemnly  promise  and  engage,  not  to  inculcate,  teach  or 
insinuate,  anything  which  shall  appear  to  me  to  con- 
tradict or  contravene,  either  directly  or  impliedly 
ANYTHING  t  taught  in  the  Confession  of  Faith  or 
Catechisms." 

Of  the  negotiations,  between  the  commissioners  of 
the  Synods  and  the  Board  of  Directors  of  the  school. 
Dr.  Griffin  makes  the  following  statement.  "  Commis- 
sioners from  the  two  Synods  met  the  Board,  in  the  city 
of  New  York,  in  May  last.     Those  from  the  Synod  of 

*  Ely's  Review,  vol.  ii.  496. 

t  The  emphasis  here  is  that  of  Dr.  Griffin,  the  use  of  which  will 
appear  below. 


252  HISTOKY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

Philadelphia  were  instructed  to  propose  the  insertion 
of  this  article,  in  the  plan  of  the  school.  A  counter- 
proposition  was  made,  to  substitute  in  the  room  of  ^  any- 
thing/ (printed  above  in  capitals,)  '  any  of  the  great 
doctrines,'  so  as  to  limit  the  promise  to  points  really 
affecting  the  system  of  truth.  This  was  not  satisfactory. 
It  was  then  moved  to  limit  the  operation  of  the  promise 
to  official  instructions,  in  the  school.  But  it  was  con- 
tended that  the  sermons  of  the  principal,  and  his 
private  conversations,  (from  house  to  house,  was  under- 
stood to  be  meant,)  might  have  a  serious  influence  on 
the  pupils,  and  ought,  therefore,  to  be  restrained.  This 
was  enough  to  show  the  construction  put  upon  the  test. 
The  Board  exceedingly  regretted  that  they  were  forced, 
by  conscience,  ultimately,  to  reject  the  article;  and  still 
more  regret  that  such  a  circumstance  should  have  de- 
feated or  suspended  the  important  union  proposed.'^* 

in  this  statement,  the  writer  leaves  out  some  of  the 
essential  facts.  At  the  suggestion  of  the  Synod  of 
Albany's  commissioners,  the  phrase  '^  any  doctrine  of 
faith,"  was  substituted  for  ^'  anything,"  in  the  pledge. 
As  thus  amended,  the  plan  was  accepted,  by  the  Phila- 
delphia commissioners,  and  by  the  Board,  acting  on 
behalf  of  the  Synod  of  New  York  and  New  Jersey. 
Upon  this  basis,  a  covenant  of  union,  for  the  manage- 
ment of  the  school,  was  at  once  agreed  upon ;  and  it 
was  not  until  afterward,  that  the  Board  assumed  the 
right,  upon  its  own  sole  authority,  to  abrogate  the  cove- 
nant, thus  solemnly  closed  by  it,  and  reject, — not  tlie 
test,  as  described  by  Dr.  Griffin ;  but  the  amended  pledge 
as  to  the  ^^  doctrines  of  faith." 

*  The  Appeal,  p.  4. 


THE   HOPKINSIAN   CONTEOVERSY.  253 

The  real  issue,  therefore,  was  not,  as  the  Appeal 
would  have  us  suppose,  upon  an  attempt  to  force  the 
ipsissima  verba,  of  the  Confession  upon  the  Africaa 
school.  But  it  was  upon  the  proposition  that  the  pro- 
fessors should  not  oppose  any  of  the  "  doctrines  of  faith," 
contained  in  the  Confession. 

In  the  Appeal,  Dr.  Griffin  states  that  "though  the 
great  doctrines  of  our  Confession  are  so  clearly  revealed 
that  they  may  reasonably  be  considered  as  settled,  yet, 
in  regard  to  many  shades  of  thought  and  fornLS  of  ex- 
pression, found  in  our  standards,  Ave  are  still  at  liberty 
to  search  the  Scriptures  daily,  to  see  if  these  thing& 
are  so.  .  .  .  If  our  standards  must  go  so  much  into 
detail,  some  freedom  of  thought,  on  smaller  matters, 
ought  to  be  understood  to  be  allowed  to  those  who  pro- 
fess to  receive  them ;  or  our  Church  must  either  be 
small,  or  contain  many  hypocrites."* 

Again,    he   says,  "  If .  there   is  a  case  in   which  he 
[a  minister]  has  a  right  to  bind  himself  to  limit  his 
instructions  by  a  human   instrument,  it  is  where  that  y 
instrument  contains  nothing  but  the  most  obvious  and 
leading  doctrines  of  the  Gospel.     But  even  this  right 
is  questionable.     It  is  safer  to  stop  where  our  fathers 
stopped.     But  it  is  asked,  Do  not  our  ministers  bind 
themselves,  by  their  ordination  vows,  to  believe  and 
teach  according  to  the  Confession?      Not  exactly  so. 
That  assent  to  the  Confession,  which  is  prescribed  in 
the  Book  of  Discipline,  is  declarative,  not  promissory 
and  this  is  all  that  ever  belongs  to  a  subscription 
creed.     AVe  declare  our  present  agreement  with  it 
is,  our  agreement  with  it  as  a  ^system/)  but  w 

*  Appeal,  p.  8. 
22 


254  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

pledge  ourselves  for  agreement  to-morrow,  further  than 
the  creed  itself  shall  be  found  to  comport  with  the  Gos- 
pel. Look  at  the  form  of  engagements  at  ordination. 
The  only  promise  exacted,  respecting  articles  of  faith, 
is  propounded  in  the  following  words  : — ^  Do  you  pro- 
mise to  be  zealous  and  faithful  in  maintaining  the  truths 
of  the  Gospel,  and  the  purity  and  peace  of  the  Church  ; 
whatever  persecution  or  opposition  may  arise  on  that 
account?'  In  this  engagement,  we  promise  to  main- 
tain the  Confession,  so  far  as  it  contains  the  truths  of 
the  Gospel,  no  farther."* 

The  writer  tells  the  friends  of  strict  subscription, 
that  '^  It  is  merely  a  question  whether  their  views,  on 
certain  minor  points,  shall  prevail  over  the  views  of 
their  brethren  ;''f  and  closes  with  the  entreaty  that 
"the  test"  may  be  "at  least  so  modified  as  to  respect 
^  the  great  doctrines'  of  our  standards. "J 

The  reader  will  observe  the  subtle  significance  which  , 
Dr.  Griffin  attaches  to  the  phrase  "  system  of  doctrine," — 
a  significance  indicated  by  marking  the  word,  " system,^ 
with  italics  and  quotations.  He  was  willing  to  be 
bound  to  "the  great  doctrines"  of  the  standards,  but 
claimed  liberty  on  the  "  minor  points."  But  what  was 
to  be  the  criterion  of  distinction  between  the  greater 
and  the  less;  and  who  was  to  be  the  judge? 

Dr.  Griffin's  publication,  it  will  be  observed,  pre- 
ceded the  famous  "Statement"  of  the  New  Haven 
professors,  some  fourteen  years.  It  was  the  first  formal 
exposition  of  the  "  system  of  doctrine"  theory  of  sub- 
scription. 

*  Appeal,  p.  15.  f  Ibid.,  p..  25.  |  Ibid.,  p.  27. 


THE   HOPKIXSIAN   COXTROYERSY.  255 

In  reply  to  "  The  New  Test/'  Dr.  Janeway  published 
a  pamphlet,  also  anonymous,  entitled — ^^The  Appeal  not 
Sustained/'  In  this  he  vindicated  the  policy  of  strict 
subscription,  according  to  the  terms  of  the  Princeton 
pledge.  His  closing  sentences  forecast  the  future,  and 
fixed  its  responsibilities. 

"  We  proclaim  it  to  the.  worlds  that,  if  the  peace  and 
harmony  of  our  Church  are  to  he  interrupted,  hy  the 
jwopagation  of  religious  opinions  contrary  to  our  adopAed 
standards  of  doctrines,  the  blame  must  be  attached  to  those 
who  introduce  such  opinions  in  violation  of  our  constitu- 
tional engagements. 

"  We  deny  the  assertion  that  the  differences  in  respect 
to  doctrinal  points  that  now  exist,  always  prevailed  in 
our  Church ;  and  in  support  of  our  denial  we  appeal  to 
the  condemnation  of  the  creed  of  the  Rev.  H.  B.  [Balch] 
noticed  already,  in  a  former  part  of  this  discussion, 
which  passed  the  General  Assembly,  with  so  great 
unanimity.  We  deny  that  ministers,  in  our  connection 
dared  till  lately  to  deny  the  representative  character  of 
Adam  and  of  Christ;  to  deny  the  imputation  of  the 
guilt  of  Adam^s  first  sin,  and  of  the  ynghteousness  of 
Christ; — to  assert  and  maintain  that  the  holy  God  is 
the  aidhor  of  sin,  and  to  propagate  the  doctrine  of  an 
indefinite  atonement ;  which  represents  Christ  as  suffer- 
ing, not  for  the  sins  of  his  elect,  who  were  given  to  him 
by  his  Father,  to  be  redeemed ;  but  merely  for  sin  in 
general,  and  to  make  an  exhibition  of  its  evil." 
A  true  warning  and  testimony,  but  unheeded. 


CHAPTER   XVI. 

GROWING   UNEASINESS   IN   THE   CHURCH. 

Apprehensions  realized  in  1814 — Plan  of  Union,  in  the  S^'nod  of 
Pittsburgh,  in  1815 — Lathrop,  a  committee-man,  in  1820 — The 
Assemblies  of  1817  and  1822  on  doctrinal  error — Bissell's  case,  in 
1820 — Case  of  Mr.  John  Chambers — The  New  J^nglarid  delegates 
to  the  Assembly  cease  to  vote — Mr.  Baird's  view  of  the  crisis  of 
1826 — Overture  of  ihe  Synod  of  Pittsburgh — Its  witlidrawal  by 
Dr.  Herron — Pittsburgh  overture  of  1831 — It  anticipated  the  Acts 
of  1837 — The  action  of  the  Assembly  upon  it — Committee-men  in 
the  Assembly  of  1831. 

Whilst  the  Plan  of  Union  and  its  resnlting  agen- 
cies were,  gradually,  but  surely  undermining  the  foun- 
dations of  the  Church,  voices  of  admonition  and  alarm 
were  occasionally  uttered.  But  they  passed  unheeded. 
In  1814,  when  Ely's  case  was  before  the  Assembly, — a 
case  growing  out  of  hostility  to  him,  on  account  of  his 
opposition  to  Hopkinsianism,  the  Rev.  Dr.  Beecher  was 
present,  as  a  delegate  from  the  General  Association  of 
Connecticut.  The  questions  before  the  Assembly,  on 
this  case,  were  purely  of  constitutional  interpretation, 
growing  out-of  a  persistent  refusal  of  four  out  of  seven 
ruling  elders,  to  allow  a  congregational  meeting,  in  order 
to  make  out  a  call  for  Mr.  Ely,  who  was  the  choice  of 
an  overwhelming  majority  of  the  Church.  Yet  on  this 
question,  so  purely  domestic.  Dr.  Beecher  used  all  his 
256 


GEOWING   UNEASINESS    IN   THE   CHURCH.         257 

eloquence  and  influence,  against  Mr.  Ely,  and  on  behalf 
of  the  recusant  elders.  "  This,"  says  the  Rev.  Thomas 
D.  Baird,  "  with  other  things,  led  to  a  conversation 
among  some  of  the  brethren,  about  the  unconstitution- 
ality of  the  Plan  of  Union,  and  the  expediency  of  its 
abrogation.  We  never,  so  far  as  we  recollect,  knew  one 
man  defend  its  constitutionality ;  but,  as  the  Presbyte- 
rian  Church  had  proved  so  sound  and  firm,  in  the  cases 
of  Mr.  Balch,  the  Cumberland  Presbyterians,  and  Mr. 
W.  C.  Davis,  it  was  supposed  that  she  could  not  be  in 
much  danger,  from  this  quarter;  and  although  uncon- 
stitutional, it  had  better  be  let  alone."*  Elias  B.  Cald- 
well, Esq.,  the  Rev.  James  Magraw,  and  the  pev. 
Thomas  D.  Baird,  were  among  the  most  decided  iii^he 
expression  of  ^leir  apprehensions.  These  were  thodght 
to  be  sufliciently  answered  by  retorts  of,  "  Bigotry !" 
and  "  Intolerance  !"  The  subject  did  not,  however,  enter 
into  the  discussions  of  the  Assembly. 

The  next  year,  in  the  Synod  of  Pittsburgh,  the 
records  of  the  Presbytery  of  Grand  River  came  up,  for 
the  first  time,  for  review.  The  committee,  to  which 
they  were  referred,  reported  that  "we  doubt  of  their 
power  to  make  Confessions  of  Faith,  distinct  from  the 
Confession  of  Faith  adopted  by  the  Presbyterian 
Church  in  the  United  States.  Perhaps,  however,  their 
circumstances  may  make  it  obvious,  that  what  they 
have  done  was  both  correct  and  necessary ;  and,  if  they 
can  mak(3  this  appear  to  the  Synod,  we  can  cheerfully 
recommend  the  approbation  of  their  records." 

The  Synod,  thereupon,  "  heard  the  members  of  Grand 

River    Presbytery,  on    the   points    alluded    to,   in    the 

*  Mr.  Baird,  in  the  Pittsburgh  Christian  Herald,  for  1837,  p.  131. 
22* 


258  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

r.bove  report,  were  satisfied  with  their  explanations,  and 
r.pproved  the  Records."*  The  explanations  were  an 
appeal  to  the  Plan  of  Union,  and  the  assurance  that  the 
questionable  measures,  were  regarded  as  but  temporary 
expedients,  in  view  of  the  '^  peculiar  circumstances"  of 
the  churches  in  that  Presbytery.  Under  this  represen- 
tation, the  Synod  reluctantly  approved  the  records ; 
although  not  without  strong  expressions  of  doubt,  by 
members,  as  to  the  propriety  of  the  action  of  the  Assem- 
bly, which  was  admitted  to  entitle  the  Presbytery  to 
exemption  from  censure.  Such  was  the  whole  extent 
of  the  Synod's  action,  of  which  Mr.  Seward  in  his  nar- 
rative, says  that  it  "  did  ratify  and  confirm  the  covenant, 
proposed  and  adopted  by  the  General  Assembly,  in 
1801." 

In  thejGi2iierarl--A=ss€mbly,  the  first  "committee-man" 
that  appeared,  avowedly  in  that  capacity,  was  Mr. 
Daniel  W.  Lathrop,  who,  in  1820,  presented  himself 
as  a  commissioner  from  the  Presbytery  of  Hartford,  in 
the  Western  Reserve.  The  case  was  referred  to  a  com- 
mittee, the  report  of  which,  after  long  discussion,  and 
the  offer  of  several  amendments,  was  recommitted  to  an 
enlarged  committee.  The  result  was  the  introduction 
and  adoption,  "  without  opposition,"  of  a  compromise 
report.  It  recited  the  objects  and  provisions  of  the 
"conventional  agreement"  of  1801,  and  closed  with  two 
resolutions : — 

"  Resolved,  In  order  to  carry  into  effect  the  friendly 
object  of  the  above  agreement,  that  Daniel  W.  Lathrop 
be  admitted,  as  a  member  of  this  Assembly. 

"  Resolved,  That  it  be  affectionately  recommended  to 
*  Printed  Minutes  Synod  of  Piitsbnrgh,  p.  114. 


GROWING   UNEASINESS   IN   THE   CHUECH.         259 

the  brethren  who  compose  mixed  societies  of  this  kind, » 
as  far  as  expediency  will  allow,  to  conform  to  the  letter 
of    the   constitution    of  the    Presbyterian    Church,    in 
making  their  appointments  and    organizing  their  con- 
gregations/'* 

Of  the  efficacy  of  such  resolutions,  the  subsequent 
history  will  give  an  illustration,  in  the  person  of  this 
same  "  committee-man,"  become  an  ordained  minister, 
and  active  member  of  the  New  School  party,  without 
ever  having  taken  those  vows  which  the  Constitution 
prescribes. 

In  the  Assembly  of  1817,  the  subject  of  doctrinal 
error  was  introduced,  as  we  have  seen,  through  the 
Pastoral  letter  of  the  Synod  of  Philadelphia,  and  the 
attempt  of  the  Synod  to  check  the  prevalent  tenden- 
cies to  defection,  w^s  visited  with  the  frown  of  the 
Assembly. 

Again,  in  1822,  a  memorial  came  up  to  the  Assembly, 
"  complaining  of  the  prevalence  of  errors  in  doctrine, 
and  requesting  the  opinion  and  advice  of  the  Assembly.'' 
It  was  referred  to  a  committee,  without  exception, 
peace  men;  including  the  delegate  from  Vermont, 
besides  one  or  two  who  were  themselves  unsound  in 
the  faith. 

The  report  of  this  committee  was  adopted  by  the 
Assembly.  That  body  could  "  never  hesitate,  on  any 
proper  occasion,  to  recommend  to  those  who,  both  at 
their  licensure  and  ordination,  professed  sincerely  to 
receive  and  adopt  the  Confession  of  Faith  of  this 
Church,  as  containing  the  system  of  doctrine  taught  in 
the  Holy  Scriptures,  and  to  all  other  members  of  our 
*  Minutes  1789-1820,  p.  754  ;  Digest,  p.  574. 


260  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

Church  steadfastly  to  adhere  to  that  ^  form  of  sound 
words.'  '^  There  were,  however,  members  present  in  that 
Assembly,  who,  neither  at  licensure  nor  ordination,  nor 
at  any  other  time,  had  officially  adopted  that  '•  form  of 
sound  words,''  nor  believed  the  doctrines  therein  taught. 
They,  no  doubt,  highly  approved  of  the  rest  of  the 
reply,  which  declared  that  the  Assembly  is  not  called 
upon  to  take  up  abstract  cases,  or  act  upon  remon- 
strances, as  to  points  of  doctrine,  or  the  conduct  of 
individuals,  unless  they  come  up  in  regular  judicial 
process.* 

The  treatment  of  Lathrop's  case  was  not  likely  to 
arrest  the  delegation  of  committee-men  to  the  supreme 
court.  In  1826,  Mr.  Josiah  Bissell,  appeared  in  the 
Assembly,  and  produced  a  commission  as  an  elder,  from 
the  Presbytery  of  Rochester.  A  member  of  that  Pres- 
bytery informed  the  Assembly  that  Mr.  Bissell  had  not 
been  set  apart,  as  an  elder  ;  but  that  he  was  appointed, 
as  was  supposed  by  the  Presbytery,  in  conformity  with 
the  conventional  agreement  of  1801.  In  the  discussion, 
it  appeared  that  he  was  not  even  a  committee-man. 
Yet,  it  was  resolved  to  admit  him  as  a  member  of  the 
Assembly. 

Against  this  action,  a  protest  was  entered,  by  forty- 
two  members  ;  in  reply  to  whom,  the  Assembly  stated 
that  the  reasons  of  its  action  were,  "1.  The  commission 
which  Mr.  Bissell  produced  was  in  due  form,  and 
signed  by  the  proper  officers  of  Presbytery.  2.  Every 
Presbytery  has  a  right  to  judge  of  the  qualifications  of 
its  own  members,  and  is  amenable  to  Synod,  and 
not  to  the  General  Assembly ;  except  by  way  of  appeal 
*  Minutes  1822,  pp.  8,  22 ;  Digest,  p.  658. 


GROWING   UNEASINESS   IN   THE   CHURCH.         261 

or  reference  or  complaint,  regularly  brought  up  from 
the  inferior  judicatories;  which  has  not  been  done  in 
the  present  case.  3.  It  would  be  a  dangerous  prece- 
dent, and  would  lead  to  the  destruction  of  all  order, 
in  the  Church  of  Christ,  to  permit  unauthenticated 
verbal  testimony  to  set  aside  an  authoritative  written  . 
document/' 

The  admission  of  Mr.  Bissell  was  carried,  by  a 
majority  of  three ;  there  being  in  the  house,  as  voting 
members,  no  less  than  seven  delegates  from  the  Con- 
gregational Associations  of  New  England !  Another 
matter,  which  came  before  this  Assembly,  was  even 
more  calculated  to  arrest  attention  to  the  relations  and 
attitude  of  those  bodies  toward  our  Church.  "^ 

Mr.  John  Chambers,  a  candidate  of  the  Prest>ytery  of 
Philadelphia,  upon  examination  for  ordination,  was  re- 
jected, on  account  of  his  doctrinal  views.  He,  thereupon, 
went  to  Connecticut,  and  was  ordained  by  the  Association 
of  the  Western  District  of  New  Haven  county ;  from 
which  he  immediately  obtained  a  dismission  to  the  Pres- 
bytery of  Philadeljjhia.  "  We  expect  you  to  receive  him 
as  one  of  us  :'' — said  they,  in  this  paper.  j 

The  Presbytery  submitted  these  facts  to  the  Assembly, 
by  which  a  committee  of  three  was  appointed,  to  visit 
the  General  Association  of  Connecticut  and  confer  on 
this  case ;  with  instructions  further,  to  inquire  whether 
any,  and  if  any  what,  further  articles  or  alteration  of 
the  present  terms  of  intercourse  between  the  churches^, 
may  be  expedient,  "  for  the  better  protection  of  the 
purity,  peace,  and  Christian  discipline  of  the  churches 
connected  with  the  two  bodies." 

The    Association  appointed   a  committee,   to   confer 


262  HISTORY   OF    THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

with  this  delegation.  They  met  in  New  York^  In 
August,  1826 ;  but  it  aj^peared  that  the  Connecticut 
committee  had  no  power  to  do  anything  in  relation  to 
Mr.  Chambers^  ordination.  It  was,  however,  agreed,  as 
a  rule  of  the  correspondence  of  the  two  bodies,  to  re- 
gard any  such  action  as  '''  irregular  and  unfriendly."  It 
was,  also,  agreed  that  the  delegates  of  the  bodies,  mutu- 
ally sent  to  each  other,  should,  thenceforward,  have 
the  right  only  to  deliberate,  and  not  to  vote. 

The  General  Assembly,  the  next  year,  addressed  a 
letter  to  the  other  New  England  Associations,  stating 
that  the  right  given  their  delegates,  to  vote  in  the  Gen- 
eral Assembly,  was  a  violation  of  the  Constitution  of 
our  Church ;  and  proposing  that  it  be  rescinded.  The 
New  Hampshire  Association  at  once  acquiesced  in  the 
chancre.  The  Convention  of  Vermont  referred  it  to  a 
committee,  to  report  the  next  year.  The  result  does 
not  appear,  on  the  minutes  of  the  Assembly.  The 
General  Association  of  Massachusetts  declined  t^  con- 
sent to  the  change ;  and  it  was  not  till  after  four  years 
of  correspondence,  that  the  Assembly,  in  1830,  received 
the  consent  of  that  Association  to  surrender  her  claim, 
thus,  to  trample  under  foot  our  Constitution,  and  exer- 
cise a  potential  control  over  the  internal  affairs  and 
most  sacred  and  peculiar  interests  of  our  Church.  By 
that  time,  her  attitude  on  this  subject  was  no  longer 
necessary,  as  a  demonstration  of  the  fixed  purpose  of 
our  New  England  brethren  to  acquire  possession  of  the 
Presbyterian  Church,  its  institutions  and  resources. 

Among  the  signers  of  the  protest,  in  the  Bissell  case, 
was^  the  Rev.  Thomas  D.  Baird.  He  had  been  an  anx- 
ious witness  of  the  first  rising  of  trouble  from  the  East, 


GROWING   UNEASINESS   IN    THE   CHUECH.         263 

as  a  member  of  the  Assembly  of  1814.  He  had  sat  in 
the  Assembly  of  1817,  and  saw  the  indications  of  grow- 
ing error  and  an  increasing  spirit  of  false  charity, 
tolerant  of  innovation,  bnt  intolerant  of  faithfulness  in 
defence  of  the  truth.  He  had  enjoyed  abundant  op- 
portunity, as  a  member  of  the  Synod  of  Pittsburgh,  to 
watch  the  working  of  the  Plan  of  Union,  there  and  in 
the  Western  Reserve.  In  the  concurring  incidents  of 
this  year,  he  recognized  a  crisis  in  our  history.  "  The 
year  1826,  was  an  eventful  year," — so  he  afterward 
wrote, — "  as  relates  to  this  subject.  The  formation  of 
the  Home  Missionary  Society, — in  our  opinion  the  most 
formidable  machine  for  the  subversion  of  Presbyterian- 
ism,  that  was  ever  invented, — the  transfer  of  the  mis- 
sions of  our  Church  to  the  American  Board,  and  the 
cases  of  Messrs.  Chambers  and  Bissell,  deeply  impressed 
the  minds  of  some  of  the  members  of  that  Assemblv, 
and  soon  began  to  create  just  and  well-founded  appre- 
hensions, that  there  was,  in  fact,  a  design  to  sap  the 
foundations  of  Presbyterianism,  by  systematic,  under- 
ground approaches.''* 

AVith  such  views,  Mr.  Baird,  upon  his  return  from 
the  Assembly  of  1826,  drafted  an  overture,  on  the  state 
of  the  Church,  for  the  consideration  of  the  Synod  of 
Pittsburgh.  In  this  document,  after  a  citation  of  some 
of  the  general  principles,  which  are  stated  in  the  Intro- 
duction to  the  Form  of  Government, — the  dangers 
threatening  the  Church,  and  the  remedy,  were  pointed 
out  in  the  following  terms : — 

"  Notwithstanding  the  adoption  and  promulgation  of 
the  above,  among  other  general  principles,  with  all  the 
^  Pittsburgh  Christian  Herald,  1837,  p.  115. 


264  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW  SCHOOL. 

care  that  has  b^en  taken,  and  all  the  means  that  have 
been  employed,  for  their  correct  application,  they  are 
oftentimes  evaded,  or  violated,  by  the  admission  into 
this  Church  of  ministers,  who  have  not  given  that  se- 
curity which  its  Constitution  expressly  demands.  Or- 
dained ministers  of  other  denominations,  witli  whom  we 
are  on  terms  of  friendly  correspondence,  coming,  with 
dismissions  as  ministers  in  good  standing,  are,  by  a 
number  of  our  Presbyteries,  received,  as  a  matter  of 
course,  without  incurring  those  obligations  by  which  we 
ourselves  are  bound ;  nor  does  even  the  form  of  install- 
ment provide  for  Ihe  omission.  There  is  also  abundant 
reason  to  apprehend  that  the  admission  of  such  is  be- 
coming still  more  common  ;  from  which,  encouragement 
has  been  taken,  even  to  require  their  reception,  as  a 
privilege  they  have  a  right  to  demand. 

"  Although  it  is  believed  that,  with  every  correct 
mind,  the  very  act  of  uniting  with  any  church,  consti- 
tutes a  tacit  adoption  of  its  doctrines  and  discipline; 
and  ought  to  be  deemed  prund  facie^  evidence  of  the 
sentiments  of  the  party  being  in  accordance  with  those 
of  the  body  with  which  he  unites ;  yet  we  are  too  well 
aware  of  the  evasions,  which  are  often  used  on  such  sub- 
jects, as  well  as  with  facts,  which  have  transpired,  not 
to  see  the  absolute  necessity  of  the  most  explicit  avowals, 
where  ministerial  consistency,  harmony  and  soundness 
in  the  faith  are  so  deeply  involved. 

"  It  cannot,  for  a  moment,  be  supposed,  that  our  ec- 
clesiastical reputation,  or  even  our  strength,  depends  on, 
or  consists  in,  the  number  of  our  adherents ;  but,  under 
the  guardian  care  of  our  Church's  Head,  on  our  unity, 

purity,  and  piety.     Where,  then,  shall  we  find  a  reason, 

*  Presumptive. 


GEOWIXG   UNEASINESS   IN   THE   CHUHCH.         265 

or  even  an  excuse,  for  the  anomaly  which  now  appears 
in  the  Presbyterian  Cluirch  ?  Here,  we  see  her  sons, 
nurtured  in  her  bosom,  fostered  by  her  care,  and  in- 
structed in  all  her  doctrines  and  rites  of  worship,  justly 
required,  before  entering  into  the  ministry,  by  a  public 
profession  of  their  faith,  to  give  a  pledge  of  the  purity 
of  their  sentiments,  and  the  correctness  of  those  doc- 
trines they  are  likely  to  inculcate;  w^hile  those  who 
have  been  raised  under  the  influence  of  other  principles, 
forms,  and  prepossessions,  are  admitted,  without  any 
such  assurance.  Surely  if  an  explicit  and  solemn  guar- 
antee be  requisite  from  those  who  have  been  instructed 
in  all  our  doctrines  and  the  forms  of  our  ritual,  much 
more  is  it  necessary  from  those  who  are  in  a  great  de- 
gree strangers  to  us  and  to  them  :  but  if  it  is  not  proper 
or  necessary  from  the  latter,  then  they  are  right  who 
would  exterminate  all  creeds  and  confessions  from  the 
Church  of  God. 

"  We  do  not,  therefore,  attempt  to  conceal  our  deep 
and  growing  concern  under  the  apprehension  of  that  dan- 
ger to  which  our  constitutional  standards,  ecclesiastical 
institutions,  and  doctrinal  purity  are  exposed,  by  receiv- 
ing ministers  of  religion,  as  constituent  members  of  our 
judicatories,  and  committing  to  their  government  and 
instructions  our  rising  congregations,  who  have  not 
incurred  the  same  obligations  by  wdiich  their  brethren 
have  plighted  their  faith. 

"  Although  we  can,  without  any  dereliction  of  princi- 
ple, or  reluctance  of  feeling,  cherish  the  most  friendly  sen- 
timents toward  those  who  diifer  from  us  in  many  particu- 
lars, and  cultivate  a  friendly  intercourse  with  them,  we 
do  not,  therefore,  believe,  that  either  principle,  prudence, 

23 


266  HISTOEY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

or  courtesy,  requires  us  to  invest  them  with  the  direction 
of  our  ecclesiastical  concerns ;  and  the  harmony,  order, 
and  beauty  of  this  branch  of  the  Zion  of  God  imperiously 
forbid  it.  Indeed,  when  our  judicatories  shall  have 
beeni,  in  a  great  measure,  composed,  as,  from  the  pres- 
ent practice,  may,  at  no  distant  period,  be  realized,  of 
those  who  have  not  submitted  to  our  regulations,  do 
not  feel  our  obligations,  and  whose  attachments  to  our 
doctrines  may  frequently  and  justly  be  questioned,  we 
may  see  our  schools,  our  funds,  and  all  our  resources 
transferred  to  other  hands,  and  employed  for  other  pur- 
poses than  those  for  which  they  have  been  bestowed 
and  accumulated,  and  we  may,  in  vain,  regret  the  apa- 
thy which  has  been  indulged,  while  surrendering,  inch 
by  inch,  the  very  foundations  on  which  our  ecclesiasti- 
cal institutions  are  based. 

"To  guard,  therefore,  as  far  as  j)i'acticable,  against 
consequences  of  so  serious  a  character  as  those  to  which 
we  have  adverted,  the  Synod  of  Pittsburgh,  respect- 
fully, yet  most  earnestly  recommends  to  the  General 
Assembly  the  adoption  of  the  following,  or  some  other, 
adequate  rule,  for  the  more  effectual  application  of  the 
'  general  principles^  avowed  and  published  in  the  Con- 
stitution of  our  Church. 

^^  Resolved,  1.  That  it  shall,  henceforth,  be  the  duty 
of  every  Presbytery  under  the  care  of  this  Assembly,  to 
keep  a  book,  in  which  shall  be  transcribed  the  obliga- 
tions required  of  ministers  of  this  Church,  at  their  ordi- 
tion ;  which  shall  be  subscribed,  in  the  following  form, 
viz. :  '  I,  A.  B.,  do,  ex  animo,"^  adopt,  receive,  and  sub- 
scribc;  the  above  obligations,  as  a  just  and  true  exhibi- 

*  From  the  heart. 


GROWING  UNEASINESS   IN  THE   CHURCH.         267 

tion  of  my  principles  and  faith ;  and  do  resolve  and 
promise  to  exercise  my  ministry  in  conformity  thereto.' 

"  2.  That  every  minister  of  the  Presbyterian  Church 
shall  be  required  to  subscribe  the  above  obligations ; 
and  that  every  individual,  who  shall  hereafter  become  a 
minister  of  this  Church,  whether  by  ordination  or  ad- 
mission from  any  other  ecclesiastical  body,  shall,  before 
taking  his  seat  in  Presbytery,  in  like  manner,  sub- 
scribe the  same. 

'^  3.  That  the  books  or  catalogues,  thus  formed,  shall  be 
annually  submitted  to  the  inspection  of  the  respective 
Synods,  as  the  other  minutes  of  Presbytery  are;  and 
the  Synods  shall  form  the  rolls  of  their  members  from 
the  catalogues,  thus  formed,  and  laid  before  them. 

"  4.  That,  as,  in  the  opinion  of  this  Assembly,  jio 
minister  of  this  Church,  who  is  not  unfriendly  to  our 
doctrines  and  discipline,  will  refuse  to  subscribe  the 
above  obligations,  it  is  the  manifest  duty  of  all  who 
cannot  conscientiously  enter  into  these  engagements,  ^' 
promptly  and  peaceably  to  withdraw."*  '■ 

This  overture  was  adopted,  by  the  Synod  of  Pitts- 
burgh, "  nemine  GontradiGente,^^'\  and  ordered  to  be  sent 
up  to  the  General  Assembly.  When  the  Assembly  of 
1827  met,  the  paper  was  placed  in  the  hands  of  the 
Committee  of  Bills  and  Overtures.  The  Rev.  Dr. 
Francis  Herron,  of  Pittsburgh,  was  Moderator  of  the 
Assembly.  Pie  called  together  the  commissioners  from 
the  Synod,  and  proposed  to  them  to  suppress  the  over- 
ture. This  they  declined  to  do.  He,  thereupon,  as- 
sumed, personally,  the  responsibility,  of  withdrawing  it 

*  Minutes  of  Synod  of  Pittsburgh,  p.  253;  Digest,  p.  658. 
+  No  one  dissenting. 


268  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

from  the  Committee,  on  which  there  were  members 
whom  that  paper  would  have  excluded  from  the  Pres- 
byterian Church. 

Some  years  after  the  controversy  had  ended,  in  the 
division  of  the  Church,  and  when  the  author  of  the 
overture  was  sleeping  in  the  dust,  it  was  the  privilege 
of  the  writer  of  this  history  to  meet  with  the  venerable 
Herron.  He,  at  once,  referred,  in  terms  of  affection,  to 
the  memory  of  Mr.  Baird,  and  remarked, — "  Had  I  and 
others  possessed  the  same  appreciation  of  the  condition 
of  things,  and  the  same  clear  forecast,  which,  at  an 
early  day,  Mr.  Baird  displayed,  our  Church  might  have 
been  saved  from  years  of  distraction  and  strife,  and 
final  division." 

IThe  above  overture  was  revived  by  the  Synod  of 
Pittsburgh,  in  1831,  with  some  modifications,  and  again 
sent  up  to  the  Assembly.  That  body  had,  at  its  pre- 
ceding meeting,  adopted  an  order,  upon  the  motion  of 
Dr.  Green,  that  licentiates  and  ministers,  coming  from 
corresponding  denominations,  into  the  Presbyterian 
Church,  should  be  required  to  answer,  affirmatively, 
the  same  questions,  respectively,  which  are  projoosed  to 
our  own  candidates  for  licensure  and  ordination.* 

The  Synod,  highly  approved  this  measure ;  yet,  ob- 
serving that  it  made  no  provision  for  the  cases  of  the 
large  numbers  who  had  already  gained  unconstitutional 
admittance  into  our  Church,  and  for  other  prevalent 
disorders,  urged  the  Assembly  to  take  further  action.  ' 
It  stated  that  ^''common  fame  loudly  proclaims,  that  in 
some  of  the  congregations  and  Presbyteries,  constitut- 
ing the  Synod  of  Western  Reserve,  and  in  some  other 
*  Minutes,  1830,  p.  12 ;  Digest,  254. 


GROWING   UNEASINESS   IN   THE   CHURCH.         269 

sections  of  our  Church,  our  constitutional  forms  and 
constitutional  obligations  are  disregarded,  in  the  organi- 
zation of  churches,  and  in  the  admission  of  members 
of  Presbyteries ;  and  that  there  is  reason  to  fear  that 
there  are  but  few  exceptions,  in  such  regions,  to  this 
remark," 

To  obviate  these  disorders,  the  Synod  proposed  to  the 
Assembly  the  adoption  of  the  following  regulations : 

*'  Resohedj  That  every  church  session,  and  Presby- 
tery, under  the  care  of  this  General  Assembly,  shall  be, 
and  hereby  is,  required  to  keep  a  book,  in  which  the 
following  formula  shall  be  recorded,  viz. :  ^  I,  A.  B., 
do  sincerely  receive  and  adopt  the  Confession  of  Faith 
and  Catechisms  of  the  Presbyterian  Church  in  the 
United  States  of  America,  according  to  the  plain  and 
obvious  meaning  of  the  words  in  which  they  are  ex- 
pressed, as  a  just  and  candid  exhibition  of  my  princi- 
ples and  faith  ;  and  I  do  promise  and  oblige  myself  to 
exercise  my  ministry,  (or  eldership,  as  the  case  may  be,) 
in  conformity  thereto.  I  do,  also,  approve  the  Form 
of  Government  and  Discipline  of  the  said  Church, 
and  do  promise  to  exercise  and  perform  my  official 
duties  according  to  the  principles  and  rules  therein 
contained.'  '^ 

The  other  regulations  of  this  overture  were,  also, 
essentially  the  same  as  those  of  1826,  excej^t  the  last, 
which  anticipated  the  disowning  acts  of  1837. — "  Re- 
solved, That  any  Synod,  Presbytery,  Minister  or  Elder, 
refusing  to  comply  with  the  above  conditions,  or  such 
other  adequate  provision  as  may  be  adopted  by  the 
General  Assembly,  shall  be  considered  as  renouncing 
the  jurisdiction  of  the  Presbyterian  Church,  and  con- 

23* 


270  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW  SCHOOL. 

sequently  no  longer  to  be  considered  in  connection  with 
that  body."* 

The  answer  of  the  General  Assembly  to  this  over- 
ture, assumed  two  directions.  On  subscription  to  the 
Confession  of  Faith,  the  Assembly  declared  no  further 
action  necessary.  It,  however,  decided  that  subscrip- 
tion includes  the  Catechisms.  As  to  the  Synod  of  the 
Western  Reserve, — it  was,  by  the  Assembly,  directed  to 
review  the  state  of  its  churches,  and  report  to  the  next 
Assembly,  touching  any  existing  disorders. 

In  the  Assembly  of  1831,  the  question  respecting 
committee-men  again  came  up,  upon  occasion  of  the 
delegtition  of  Clement  Tuttle  who  was  designated  in  his 
commission,  a  ^^committee-man/'  from  the  Presbytery 
of  Grand  River.  The  Committee  on  Elections,  to 
whom  the  case  was  referred,  declined  to  express  any 
opinion,  on  the  constitutional  question.  The  Assembly, 
however,  determined  to  enroll  him  as  a  member. 

Against  this  decision,  a  protest  was  entered,  by  R.  J. 
Breckinridge,  and  sixty-six  others.  Mr.  Daniel  W. 
Lathrop,  now  a  minister,  reported  a  reply,  which  was 
adopted.  This  reply  admits  that  the  case  involves  "an 
appearance  of  departure  from  the  letter  of  the  Consti- 
tution /'  but  not  its  spirit ;  because  the  definition  of 
Ruling  Elders,  in  the  Form  of  Government,  chapter  v., 
describes  exactly  the  character  of  the  committee-men. 
To  have  refused  the  committee-man  a  seat  would  have 
been  to  violate  "a  solemn  compact," — the  Plan  of 
Union, — "as  that  instrument  has  been  construed  and 
acted  on  by  the  Assembly,  during  the  last  ten  years. 
To  refuse  such  commissioners  a  seat,  would  also  be  to 
*  Minutes  Synod  of  Pittsburgh,  p.  354. 


GROWING   UNEASINESS   IN   THE   CHURCH.         271 

wrest  from  the  Presbytery  a  constitutional  right  to  a 
representation  in  the  Assembly ;  inasmuch  as  the  prac- 
tice of  the  Assembly  for  the  last  ten  years,  afforded  a 
full  warrant  to  Presbyteries  to  expect  that  a  representa- 
tive of  this  character  would  be  received  as  a  member." 
"The  conventional  agreement  expressly  provides  tliat 
laymen,  of  the  character  there  contemplated,  shall  be 
admitted  to  the  Presbyteries,  on  an  equality  with  elders. 
If,  therefore,  there  is,  in  connection  with  this  subject, 
an  infraction  of  the  Constitution,  it  is,  in  the  treaty 
itself ;  and  the  only  proper  remedy  for  the  supposed  evil, 
would  he,  in  a  I'cgular  proceeding  to  amend  or  annul  the 
said  treaty  J' '^ 

Toward  the  close  of  this  Assembly,  the  withdrawal 
of  members,  upon  leave  of  absence,  gave  a  majority  to 
the  Old  School,  and  a  resolution  was  submitted,  as 
follows : 

"  Resolved,  That,  in  the  opinion  of  the  General 
Assembly,  the  appointment,  by  some  Presbyteries,  as 
has  occurred  in  a  few  cases,  of  members  of  standing 
committees  to  be  members  of  General  Assembly,  is 
inexpedient,  and  of  questionable  constitutionality ;  and, 
therefore,  ought  not  in  future  to  be  made." 

In  the  discussion  on  this  subject.  Dr.  Spring  showed 
that  the  Plan  of  Union  never  contemplated  the  right 
of  Presbyteries  sending  committee-men  to  sit  in  the 
Assembly.  He  pointed  out  the  evils  resulting  from 
the  system,  and  stated  that  these  Presbyteries  sometimes 
send  delegates  to  the  Assembly  who  are  not  even  com- 
mittee-men ;  that  there  might  be  a  number  of  them  on 
this  floor,  and  but  for  their  influence,  in  the  decisions 

*  Minutes,  1831,  p.  195. 


272  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW  SCHOOL. 

of  this  house,  we  might  this  day  be  at  peace.  He 
intimated  that  he  did  not  speak  upon  surmise;  and 
being  called  upon  for  facts,  he  appealed  to  the  Rev.  Dr. 
Snodgrass,  who  rose,  and  named  a  member  of  the 
Assembly,  who  was  represented  in  his  commission  as 
an  elder,  but  who  had  confessed  himself  to  be  not  even 
a  committee-man.  This  was  in  that  famous  Assembly 
of  1831,  in  which.  Dr.  Beman  presided.  He  wished 
the  privilege  of  taking  part  in  this  discussion.  But  his 
suggestion  being  opposed  was  withdrawn.  The  resolu- 
tion was  then  adopted,  by  a  vote  of  eighty-one  to  fifty- 
three. 

But  the  great  controversy,  the  history  of  which  is 
here  traced,  concerned  not  only,  the  doctrinal  purity  of 
the  Church,  and  the  maintenance  of  the  divine  order  of 
God's  house.  It,  also,  involved  the  evangelic  office 
of  the  Church,  itself, — her  right  and  duty,  with  her  own 
hands,  to  minister  to  the  wants  of  the  needy,  and  carry 
the  gospel  of  salvation  to  a  perishing  world.  To  that 
topic  we  shall  next  address  ourselves. 


CHAPTER    XVII. 

EARLIER   EVANGELIC   AGENCIES. 

The  General  Presbytery  organized  as  an  evangelic  society — Such 
its  office  and  work — The  fund  for  i^ious  uses — Its  home  missions — 
Its  attention  to  ministerial  education — Rev.  John  Brainard's  mis- 
sion— Indian  missions,  at  the  beginning  of  this  century — Missions 
of  the  Synod  of  Virginia — Western  Missionary  Society,  of  the 
Synod  of  Pittsburgh — Missions  of ^  the  Synod  of  the  Carolinas — 
Sandusky  mission — Its  transfer  to  Maumee — ISIode  of  the  Assem- 
bly's management  of  its  missions — The  standing  committee  of  mis- 
sions— Ministerial  education. 

We  have  already  seen,  that  the  General  Presbytery 
was  organized,  as  an  evangelic  society  ;  and  so  viewed, 
distinctly,  by  its  members.  Its  founders  conceived  the 
Church  to  have  been  constructed  by  her  Head  to  be  his 
chosen  and  sufficient  instrumentality,  to  fulfill  the  great 
commission  and  carry  the  gospel  to  every  creature. 
Whilst  yet  unorganized,  and  scattered  abroad,  as  isolated 
lamps  in  surrounding  darkness,— when  planning  the 
increase  and  diifusion  of  the  light,  they,  at  once,  recog- 
nized their  own  organization,  after  the  scriptural  model 
of  our  Presbyterian  standards,  as  being  the  fundamental 
step  in  the  whole  matter. 

Hence,  they  at  once  announced  themselves,  in  this 
capacity.  Their  statement  to  Sir  Edmund  Harrison, 
we  have  already  seen.     To  the  Synod  of  Glasgow,  they 

273 


274  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

write  to  the  same  effect. — "  We  have,  for  some  years 
past,  formed  ourselves  into  a  Presbyterial  meeting,  and 
to  our  capacities,  (considering  our  infancy,  paucity,  and 
the  many  oppositions  and  discouragements  we  have  all 
along  struggled  with,)  taken  what  care  we  could,  that 
our  meeting,  though  small,  might  be  for  the  general 
good  of  religion  in  these  parts/^ 

The  reader  of  the  minutes  of  this  body,  at  once  feels, 
that,  he  is  perusing  the  records  of  a  missionary  society. 
The  business  of  their  meetings,  was,  to  devise  and 
execute  the  most  efficient  means  of  spreading  the  gospel. 
Their  correspondence  with  Europe  was  opened  with 
that  object  and  occupied  with  that  theme.  They  feel- 
ingly exhibit  the  destitutions  around  them,  and  plead 
with  their  more  favored  European  brethren,  for  more 
men,  to  supply  the  Avant,  and  for  money  to  support 
them,  when  sent  out. 

As  early  as  1717,  they,  out  of  their  own  poverty, 
laid  the  foundation  of  a  '^  fund  for  pious  uses,^^  to  which 
they  solicited  the  annual  contributions  of  their  people. 
It  began  with  ,the  sum  of  "  eighteen  pounds,  one  shil- 
ling, and  sixpence,"  given  ^^  by  the  members  of  the 
Synod  themselves,"  and  ^^  weighed  and  delivered  into 
the  hands  of  Mr.  Jedidiah  Andrews,  treasurer  for  the 
time  being;" — a  most  liberal  contribution,  in  their 
poverty,  from  those  faithful  and  zealous  servants  of 
Christ.  There  were  present,  thirteen  ministers  and 
six  elders ;  who  thus  gave  a  fraction  less  than  a  pound 
each ;  equivalent  to  much  more,  in  the  present  day ;  a 
sum  which  well  justified  the  moving  appeals  urged  by 
them  for  aid  from  Europe.  ^^  We  ourselves,"  say  they, 
"  have  begun  a  small  fund,  for  this  and  other  religious 


EARLIER   EVANGELIC   AGENCIES.  275 

purposes  among  us.  But,  alas !  it  is  yet  so  small  that 
little  or  nothing  can  be  done  by  it."  Men  of  God, 
well  done  !  "  The  little  one  shall  become  a  thousand, 
and  a  small  one  a  strong  nation." 

The  first  appropriation,  from  this  fund,  was  made 
in  1719,  when  ^^a  tenth  part  of  the  neat  produce  of  the 
Glasgow  collection"  was  given  to  the  Presbyterian  con- 
gregation of  New  York,  toward  the  support  of  the 
gospel  among  them.  The  foundations  of  the  magnifi- 
cent churches  of  New  York  city  all  rest  on  this  appro- 
priation, made  in  faith,  out  of  the  depth  of  poverty,  in 
that  day  of  small  things. 

In  1722,  the  first  formal  appointment  of  itinerant 
missionaries  was  made.  The  Kev.  Messrs.  Hugh  Conn, 
John  Orme,  and  William  Stewart,  were  directed, 
severally,  to  visit  some  Protestant  dissenting  families  in 
Virginia,  who  were  desirous  of  supplies  from  the  Synod, 
to  preach  four  Sabbaths  each.  From  the  date  of  that 
appointment,  the  missionary  exertions  of  our  fathers 
were  constant  and  untiring,  commissioning,  sometimes, 
settled  pastors,  sent  on  tours  of  a  few  weeks ;  and, 
sometimes,  missionaries  destined  to  permanent  settle- 
ment, in  the  new  churches,  founded  in  the  wilderness. 
They  were  the  first  home  missionaries  on  the  continent. 

For  the  first  century  of  her  existence,  until  the  Plan 
of  Union  had  time  to  work  out  some  of  its  proper 
effects,  the  right  aiid  duty  of  the  Church  to  fulfill  those 
functions,  which  are  now  entrusted  to  the  immediate 
charge  of  her  Boards,  were  never  questioned ;  whilst 
they  constituted,  in  fact,  the  principal  business,  in  the 
annual  meetings  of  the  supreme  court.  From  the  first 
hour  of  her  existence,  we  have  seen  that  domestic  mis- 


276  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

sions  were  her  immediate  charge,  and  received,  in  all 
her  sessions,  the  most  earnest  attention.  When  the 
General  Presbytery  was  but  four  years  old,  she  took 
authoritative  control  of  the  ministerial  training  of  David 
Evans.  And,  from  that  day,  the  charge  of  education, 
academic  and  theological,  was  among  her  recognized 
and  most  active  functions.  In  that  office,  the  Old  Side 
Synod  patronized  Mr.  Alison^s  school,  established  at 
New  London,  in  1741 ;  whilst  the  New  Side  were 
laying  the  foundations,  broad  and  deep,  of  New  Jersey 
College. 

A  general  and  systematic  plan  was  adopted,  by  the 
General  Synod,  in  1771,  for  the  support  and  education  of 
candidates  for  the  ministry ;  and  means  taken  to  obtain 
the  requisite  funds,  from  the  liberality  of  the  churches. 
The  expected  results,  however,  were  greatly  diminished, 
by  the  occurrence  of  the  Revolutionary  war.  After  the 
close  of  the  war,  the  subject  received  comparatively 
little  attention,  in  the  deliberations  of  the  supreme 
court,  until  1805,  wdien  the  incipient  steps  w^ere  taken, 
which,  in  a  few  years,  resulted  in  the  organization  of  the 
Board  of  Education. 

Whilst  devoting  its  utmost  energies  to  home  evangeli- 
zation, the  General  Synod  was  not  indifferent  to  the 
condition  of  the  heathen.  In  1751,  a  standing  rule 
was  adopted,  in  view  of  the  "  exigencies  of  the  great 
affair  of  propagating  the  gospel  among  the  heathen,^' 
that  a  collection  be  taken,  in  each  of  the  churches,  for 
that  object,  once  a  year.  On  this  fund,  the  Rev.  John 
Brainard  was  sustained,  among  the  Indians  of  New 
Jersey,  until  his  death,  in  1781. 

With   the   beginning   of  the   present   century,   new 


EARLIER   EVANGELIC   AGENCIES.  277 

efforts  were  made  by  the  courts  of  our  Church  in  be- 
half of  the  aborigines.  In  1801,  the  Assembly  and  its 
Committee  of  Missions,  each,  published  an  appeal  for 
missionaries  to  labor  among  the  Indians.  That  same 
year,  the  Commission  of  the  Synod  of  Virginia  reported 
to  the  Assembly,  that  besides  the  labors  expended 
within  the  bounds  of  the  Synod,  it  had  sent  two  mis- 
sionaries to  Detroit,  two  to  Cornplanter,  chief  of  the 
Senecas,  and  two  to  the  settlements  on  the  Muskingum. 
The  next  year,  it  reported  nine  missionaries,  sent  west 
of  the  Alleghanies,  for  different  periods  of  time.  Of 
these,  three  were  sent  to  the  Shawanese  and  other 
Indians,  about  Detroit  and  Sandusky.  These  were 
temporary  laborers.  It  also  sent  a  pious  young  man,  ta 
instruct  them  in  agriculture.  Bine  Jacket,  an  Indian- 
boy,  instructed  in  Virginia,  under  the  direction  of  the 
Commission,  had  given  evidence  of  a  work  of  gracCj 
and  was  to  go  out  as  an  interpreter ;  and  the  prospect 
of  success  in  this  mission  was  favorable. 

That  same  year,  the  Synod  was  divided,-  and  the 
Synod  of  Pittsburgh  erected.  At  its  first  meeting  held 
in  Pittsburgli,  1802,  the  following  constitution  was 
adopted  by  the  Synod,  in  order  to  facilitate  its  mis- 
sionary operations  : — 

"1.  The  Synod  of  Pittsburg  shall  be  styled,  The 
Western  Missionary  Society. 

"  2.  The  object  of  the  Missionary  Society  is,  to  dif- 
fuse the  kng)wledge  of  the  Gospel  among  the  inhabitants 
of  the  new  settlements,  the  Indian  Tribes,  and,  if  need 
be,  among  some  of  the  interior  inhabitants,  where  they 
are  not  able  to  support  the  gospel. 

"3.  The  society  shall  annually  appoint  a  Board  of 

24 


278  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

Trust,  consisting  of  seven  members;  a  majority  of 
whom  shall  be  a  quorum,  whose  duty  it  shall  be  to 
transact  all  missionary  business,  which  may  occur,  neces- 
sary to  be  done,  between  the  annual  meetings  of  the 
society  ;  which  Board  shall  meet  quarterly. 

'^  4.  It  is  required  of  the  Trustees,  that  they  employ 
none  as  missionaries,  except  those  who  give  credible  evi- 
dence of  being  the  subjects  of  special  grace,  and  of  their 
Christian  zeal,  wisdom,  information,  and  experience,  in 
ministerial  labors ;  which  may  enable  them  to  do  the 
work  of  evangelists,  in  the  most  self-denying  circum- 
stances. 

"  5.  The  Board  of  Trust  shall  have  authority  to 
draw  money  from  the  Treasury,  to  pay  the  missionaries 
whom  they  have  appointed.  It  is  expected,  also,  that 
the  Board  of  Trust  will  give  directions  to  the  mission- 
aries, how  long  they  shall  be  out,  and  where  their  mis- 
sion shall  be. 

"  6.  The  Board  of  Trust  are  required  to  lay  before 
the  society,  at  their  annual  meeting,  in  fair  records,  all 
their  proceedings,  together  with  the  journals  of  the  mis- 
sionaries ;  and,  if  it  can  be,  to  have  the  missionaries 
attend,  themselves. 

^'  7.  That  the  society  engage  a  suitable  person,  annu- 
ally, to  preach  a  missionary  sermon,  on  the  Thursday, 
next  after  the  opening  of  the  Synod ;  at  which,  a  col- 
lection shall  be  made,  '  for  the  support  of  missionaries.' 

^'  Agreeably  to  the  above  plan,  the  Synod  proceeded 
to  the  election  of  members  as  a  Board  of  Trust,  when 
the  following  persons  were  duly  elected,  viz. :  The  Rev. 
Messrs.  John  McMillan,  David  Smith,  Thomas  Mar- 
quis,  and    Thomas    Hughes ;    together    with    Messrs. 


EARLIER    EVANGELIC   AGENCIES.  279 

James  Edgar,  William  Plummer  and  James  Caldwell, 
Elders.''* 

About  this  time,  also,  the  Synod  of  the  Carolinas, 
entered  upon  the  same  work,  in  the  Southern  field.  At 
its  sessions,  in  1802,  it  appointed  two  missionaries  to 
visit  the  Natches,  and  also  created  a  Commission  to 
attend  to  the  missionary  business ;  by  which  the  Rev. 
William  C.  Davis  was  sent  to  the  Catawbas.  Thus 
began  the  labors  of  that  Synod,  among  the  Indians  of 
the  South,  the  history  of  which  remains  to  be  written. 

The  Indian  missions  of  the  Pittsburgh  Synod  were 
conducted,  at  first,  by  the  agency  of  itinerant  and  tem- 
porary laborers.  But  the  results  soon  demanded  closer 
attention  and  permanent  missionaries.  In  1805,  the 
Kev.  Joseph  Badger  was  appointed  a  stated  missionary 
to  the  Wyandots,  at  Sandusky.  Two  wdiite  men,  as 
laborers,  one  of  whom  was  ultimately  to  be  engaged  as 
a  teacher,  and  one  black  man  and  his  wife,  were  also 
employed ;  live  stock,  household  furniture,  farming 
tools,  and  a  boat  were  sent  on ;  and  the  foundations 
laid  for  a  permanent  and  vigorous  mission.  In  1806, 
the  Synod  applied  to  the  Assembly  to  assume  the  charge 
of  this  mission.  This  the  Assembly  declined,  but 
granted  it  pecuniary  aid  thenceforward,  for  a  series  of 
years. 

The  Sandusky  mission  was  continued,  until  the  war 
of  1812,  when,  that  region  becoming  the  scene  of  hos- 
tilities, it  was  necessarily  suspended.  After  the  war,  it 
was  partially  resumed.  But  the  multiplying  of  the 
white  population,  and  the  gradual  dispersion  of  the  In- 

*  Printed  "Kecords  of  the  Synod  of  Pittsburgh"  from  1802  to  1832, 
p.  11. 


280  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

dians,  induced  its  transfer  to  Maumee^  in  1822.  Here, 
buildings  were  erected,  a  mission  organized,  and  the 
foundations  of  a  prosperous  future  laid.  The  ultimate 
destination  of  this  mission  we  shall  see  hereafter;  as 
also  the  history  of  the  Assembly's  own  mission  to  the 
Cherokees  of  the  South. 

It  is  not,  however,  our  present  object  to  trace  the 
details  of  the  plans  and  administration  of  the  Synods 
and  Assembly,  in  the  evangelic  enterprise ;  but  merely 
to  illustrate  the  thoroughness  with  which  this  was,  from 
the  beginning,  {appreciated  by  our  Church,  as  the  pecu- 
liar and  paramount  office  of  her  courts. 

After  the  organization  of  the  General  Assembly,  the 
rapid  enlargement  of  the  Church,  and  increase  of  its 
business  induced  great  embarrassment  in  managing  the 
various  branches  of  evangelic  enterprise,  from  the  long 
intervals  between  the  sessions  of  the  Assemblv,  and  the 
brief  time  allotted  to  deliberation,  when  convened. 

Still,  for  a  time,  the  proper  remedy  did  not  suggest 
itself,  or  may  have  been,  in  the  circumstances,  of  doubt- 
ful practicability.  Until  1802,  the  whole  missionary 
business  was  performed  by  the  Assembly,  while  in  ses- 
sion. The  field  covered  by  the  Synods  of  Virginia  and 
the  Carolinas  was,  at  their  request,  remitted  to  the 
charge  of  those  Synods ;  the  Assembly  reserving  the 
right  to  send  missionaries  there,  at  its  own  discretion. 
Tlie  rest  of  the  country  was  under  the  immediate 
administration  of  the  Assembly  ;  and,  by  it  and  the 
Synods,  the  work  was  conducted  in  the  same  manner. 
The  missionaries  were  all  itinerants.  They  were  often 
settled  pastors,  who  were  sent  on  j^rescribed  tours, 
among  the  destitute  settlemisnts.     The  Assembly,  whilst 


EARLIER   EVANGELIC   AGENCIES.  281 

in  session,  received  the  reports  of  those  who  had  been 
sent  out  the  year  before ;  aj^proved  or  censured  them ; 
audited  their  accounts ;  nominated  missionaries  for  the 
ensuing  year ;  defined  their  route  of  service,  and  deter- 
mined their  compensation. 

In  1802,  a  standing  committee  of  missions  was  ap- 
pointed, consisting  of  seven  members  of  the  Assembly. 
Its  business  was  merely  to  collect  and  digest  informa- 
tion for  the  Assembly  during  the  recess.  It  was  con- 
tinued, until  the  close  of  the  Assembly  following  that 
by  which  it  was  appointed,  when  the  members  were 
superseded  by  others.  Gradually,  the  powers  of  this 
committee  were  increased,  and  its  organization  perfected. 
In  1816  its  name  was  changed  to  the  Board  of  Missions, 
and  the  whole  business  was  assigned  to  it,  subject  to 
the  annual  supervision  and  control  of  the  Assembly. 

Whilst  the  energies  of  the  Assembly  were  so  strenu- 
ously given  to  the  supply  of  the  destitute  with  the 
Gosj)el,  her  attention  was  arrested,  in  1805,  by  an  over- 
ture written  by  the  Rev.  Dr.  Ashbel  Green,  showing 
the  necessity  of  greater  efficiency  in  the  education  of 
candidates  for  the  ministry.  The  subject  was  trans- 
mitted to  the  Presbyteries,  for  consideration,  and  referred 
to  the  next  Assembly. 

In  1806,  the  Assembly,  after  hearing  the  reports  of 
the  Presbyteries,  and  anxious  deliberation  on  the  sub- 
ject, determined  to  recommend  to  every  Presbytery,  "  to 
use  their  utmost  endeavors  to  increase,  by  all  suitable 
means  in  their  power,  the  number  of  ])romising  candi- 
dates for  the  holy  ministry ; — to  press  it  uj^on  the 
parents  of  pious  youth,  to  endeavor  to  educate  them 
for  the  Church ; — and  on  the  youth,  themselves  to  de- 

24* 


282  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

vote  their  talents  and  their  lives  to  the  sacred  calling ; — 
to  make  vigorous  exertions  to  raise  funds,  to  assist  all 
the  youth  who  may  need  assistance ; — to  be  careful  that 
the  youth  they  take  on  their  funds  give  such  evidence 
as  the  nature  of  the  case  admits,  that  they  possess  both 
talents  and  piety; — ^to  inspect  the  education  of  these 
youths,  during  the  course  of  both  academic  and  theolog- 
ical studies, — choosing  for  them  such  schools,  semina- 
ries, and  teachers,  as  they  may  judge  most  proper  and 
advantageous ;  so  as,  eventually  to  bring  them  into  the 
ministry  well  furnished  for  their  work/' 

The  Assembly,  further,  ordered  the  Presbyteries  to 
make  annual  report  to  it,  "  stating  what  they  have  done 
in  this  concern;  or  why, — if  the  case  shall  be  so, — they 
have  done  nothing  in  it ;  and  that  the  Assembly  will, 
when  these  reports  are  received,  consider  each,  distinctly, 
and  decide,  by  vote,  whether  the  Presbyteries,  severally, 
shall  be  considered  as  having  discharged  or  neglected 
their  duty  in  this  important  business." 

The  Assembly  of  1817,  attempted  to  remedy  some 
defects  which  were  found  in  the  working  of  this  plan, 
by  recommending,  to  Presbyteries  which  have  funds 
but  no  candidates,  to  correspond  with  other  Presbyteries 
or  the  Assembly,  for  the  j^urpose  of  obtaining  benefi- 
ciaries. The  inadequacy  of  this  attempt  soon  became 
apparent ;  at  the  same  time  that  it  arrested  attention, 
anew,  to  the  whole  subject  involved. 


CHAPTER    XVIII. 

THE    EDUCATION    QUESTIOJT. 

Causes  of  uneasiness — Organization  of  the  American  Education 
Society — Origin  of  the  Presbyterian  Education  Society,  of  Phila- 
delphia— Presbyterian  Education  Society  of  New  York — Proposed 
union  of  the  two — Erection  of  the  Board  of  Education  in  1819 — 
Endowed  with  efficient  powers,  after  five  years — Reorganized,  with 
Dr.  John  Breckinridge  as  Secretary,  in  1831 — Auburn  Seminary — 
Maryville  Seminary. 

Coincident  with  the  occurrence  of  the  question  as 
to  the  education  of  ministerial  candidates,  were  the 
agitations  which  divided  the  New  York  Missionary 
Society ;  the  dissatisfaction  in  the  Synod  of  Philadel- 
phia, at  the  spread  of  Hopkinsian  doctrines ;  and  the 
opposition  to  Princeton  Seminary,  which  was  manifest- 
ing itself,  in  connection  with  the  inaugural  pledge  of 
the  professors,  to  which  we  have  already  referred. 

In  1815,  the  American  Education  Society  had  been 
organized,  in  Boston ;  and  was  already  putting  forth  its 
energies,  to  possess  and  control  the  Presbyterian 
Church ;  giving  occasion,  to  anxious  fears,  on  the  one 
hand,  and,  on  the  other,  to  high  expectation,  as  to 
its  influence,  in  forming  the  future  character  of  her 
ministry. 

Under  the  influence  of  such  considerations  as  these 
circumstances  were  calculated  to  induce,  a  conference 

283 


284  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

was  held,  in  Baltimore,  at  the  close^  of  the  sessions  of 
the  Synod  of  Philadelphia  there,  in  October,  1818,  to 
consult  on  the  formation  of  an  education  society.  As 
the  result,  the  Rev.  Drs.  Janeway  and  Neill,  and  the 
Kev.  James  Patterson,  were  appointed,  to  mature  a 
plan  for  such  a  society ;  and  the  E,ev.  R.  F.  N.  Smith, 
the  editor  of  the  Religious  Museum,  published  at  Mil- 
ton, Pa.,  was  requested  to  announce  the  proceedings  to 
the  public ;  which  he  did,  earnestly  recommending  the 
subject  to  his  readers,  and  especially  to  the  members  of 
Synod ;  to  each  of  whom  he  sent  a  copy  of  the  paper. 

The  committee  engaged  in  an  extensive  correspond- 
ence, on  the  subject.  They  found  it  to  be  the  opinion 
of  the  Professors  of  the  Theological  Seminary  at 
Princeton,  and  of  many  other  ministers  and  members 
of  the  Presbyterian  Church,  tliat  one  general  education 
society  ought  to  be  established;  which  should 'be  under 
the  immediate  inspection  of  the  General  Assembly,  and 
which  should  be  a  faithful  representative  of  the  whole 
denomination ; — that  this  society  ought  to  embody,  sys- 
tematize, and  direct,  all  the  energies  of  our  Presbyteries 
and  congregations,  which  may  be  devoted  to  the  educa- 
tion of  young  men  willing  to  consecrate  themselves  to 
the  ministry,  but  unable  to  defray  their  own  expenses, 
while  preparing  for  the  work  ; — that  this  society  ought 
to  carry  the  sons  of  her  adoption  through  the  whole 
course  of  their  academical  and  theological  studies,  until 
they  obtain  licensure ; — that  the  managers  of  this 
society  should  serve  as  a  standing  committee,  or  Board 
of  Education,  for  the  supreme  judicatory  of  the  Church; 
through  which  all  the  Presbyteries,  and  such  auxiliary 
societies  as  might  be  formed,  should  annually  report  to 


THE    EDUCATION   QUESTION".  285 

the  Assembly,  what  they  have  clone  on  this  subject ; — 
and  that  this  society  should,  from  the  surplus  funds  of 
the  different  Presbyteries,  and  such  other  resources  as 
may  be  obtained,  create  a  general  fund,  from  -svliich  all 
co-operating  Presbyteries  and  auxiliary  societies,  may 
derive  such  assistance  as  the  number  of  their  candidates, 
and  other  circumstances  may  demand.* 

With  a  view  to  effecting  such  an  organization,  the 
committee  called  a  meeting,  in  the  Third  Church,  Phila- 
delphia, on  the  9th  of  December,  1818.  This  meeting 
appointed  the  Rev.  Drs.  Janeway,  Neill,  Wilson,  Green, 
Alexander,  and  Miller,  with  the  Pev.  James  Patterson, 
a  committee  to  draught  a  constitution,  to  be  reported  at 
an -adjourned  meeting,  to  be  held  on  the  17th  of  the 
same  month.  At  that  time,  the  constitution  was  re- 
ported and  adoj^ted,  the  society  organized,  and  officers 
elected. 

Simultaneous  with  this  movement,  in  Philadelphia, 
was  a  similar  one,  in  Xew  York.  On  the  23d  day  of 
October,  1818,  a  number  of  ministers  and  laymen  met 
in  the  session  room  of  the  Brick  Church,  Xew  York, 
and  resolved,  unanimously,  to  attempt  the  formation  of 
a  society,  for  the  education  of  poor  and  pious  youth,  for 
the  gospel  ministry.  A  committee  was  appointed,  to 
prepare  a  plan  for  such  a  society.  The  committee  met, 
on  the  10th  of  November,  in  the  session  room  of  the 
Wall  Street  Church,  and  agreed  upon  the  form  of  a 
constitution.  This  they  reported  to  a  meeting  held  at 
New  Brunswick,  New  Jersey,  on  the  26th  of  November, 
wdien  a  society  was  organized,  under  the  style  of  "  The 

*  First  Annual  Report  of  the  Presb.  Ed.  Soc.,  etc.,  May  29,  1819. 
Philadelxjhia,  Printed  by  Jacob  Frick  &  Co.,  8yo.  pp:  15. 


286  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

Education  Society  of  the  Presbyterian  Church  In  the 
United  States  of  America." 

Drs.  Alexander  and  Miller,  attended  this  meeting. 
But  they  found  the  prevalent  feelings  so  hostile  to  the 
authority  of  the  General  Assembly,  to  the  doctrines  of 
/  the  standards,  In  their  strict  acceptation,  and  to  the 
plan  of  Princeton  Seminary,  that  they  withdrew,  and 
returned  home. 

The  essential  difference  between  the  two  societies 
appears,  distinctly,  on  the  face  of  their  constitutions. 
The  society,  organized  at  New  Brunswick,  the  seat  of 
which  was  New  York,  jealous  of  ecclesiastical  control, 
and  of  doctrinal  strictness,  made  no  recognition,  in  its 
articles,  of  the  authority  of  the  Assembly,  and  no  pro- 
vision for  any  denominational  relations,  whatever ;  nor 
for  the  theological  training  of  beneficiaries.  "  Article 
1.  This  society  shall  be  called — The  Education  Society 
of  the  Presbyterian  Church,  In  the  United  States  of 
America.  Article  2.  The  object  of  the  Society  shall  be, 
to  assist  indigent  and  pious  young  men,  destined  for  the 
gospel  ministry,  in  acquiring  an  academical  education." 
— And  that  was  all. 

The  constitution  of  the  other  society  contained  these 
clauses. — "Article  1.  This  Society  shall  be  called — The 
Education  Society  of  the  Presbyterian  Church,  under 
the  care  of  the  General  Assembly.  Article  2.  The 
object  of  this  society  shall  be  to  furnish  pious  and 
indigent  youth,  of  the  Presbyterian  denomination,  who 
have  the  gospel  ministry  In  view,  Avith  the  means  of 
pursuing  their  academical  and  theological  studies.  Ar- 
ticle 8.  It  shall  be  the  duty  of  the  Board  of  Managers, 
every  year,  to  communicate  to  the  General  Assembly, 


THE    EDUCATION   QUESTION.  287 

for  their  information,  a  copy  of  the  report,  required  by 
the  last  article,  [the  annual  report,]  as  soon  as  possible 
after  it  shall  have  been  laid  before  the  Society.  Article 
13.  The  annual  meetings  of  the  society  shall  be,  always, 
held  in  the  city  of  Philadelphia,  on  the  Tuesday  next 
after  the  commencement  of  the  annual  sessions  of  each 
General  Assembly  of  the  Presbyterian  Church ;  at  such 
time  and  place  as  the  Board  of  Managers  may  direct.^' 
,  At  the  third  meeting  of  the  Board  of  Managers  of 
the  Philadelphia  Society,  held  on  the  11th  of  January, 
1819,  their  attention  was  called  to  a  printed  circular 
letter,  signed  by  the  Rev.  Dr.  James  Pichards,  of 
Newark,  New  Jersey,  and  others,  stating  that  an  offer 
had  been  made,  by  some  members  of  the  New  York 
society,  through  the  brethren  at  Princeton,  for  the 
union  of  the  two  societies,  on  certain  specified  terms. 
The  writer  stated,  that,  pained  at  the  existence  of  two 
rival  societies,  and  anxious  not  to  lose  tlie  benefit  of  a 
general  and  combined  operation,  some  of  the  brethren 
had  proposed  to  the  gentlemen  at  Princeton,  through 
a  common  friend,  "so  to  enlarge  the  object  of  the 
society,  as  to  Include,  according  to  their  wishes,  both  a 
theological  and  academical  course,  and  to  locate  the 
institution  in  Philadelphia, — as  the  American  Bible 
Society  is  located  In  New  York, — by  choosing  two- 
thirds  of  the  directors  there ;  thus  making  that  city  the 
chief  seat  of  operations ;  retaining,  however,  the  prin- 
ciple of  alternation.  In  the  anniversary.^'* 

This  circular,  although   not   officially  certified,  was 

*  Extracts  from  the  circular,  in  the  MS.  records  of  the  Preshn.  Ed. 
Soc,  under  the  care  of  the  General  Assembly,  deposited  with  the 
Board  of  Education. 


288  HISTORY   OF   THE    NEW   SCHOOL. 

sent  out  under  the  auspices  of  the  New  York  Society ; 
and  was,  therefore,  supposed  to  be  an  authentic  state- 
ment of  what  it  was  willing  to  do.  The  Board  of 
Managers  at  Philadelphia,  therefore,  drafted  a  project 
of  union,  on  the  basis  here  indicated;  in  which,  the 
only  modification  suggested,  upon  the  New  York  over- 
ture, was,  with  respect  to  the  annual  meeting.  Anxious 
that  it  should  be  held  in  the  presence  of  the  General 
Assembly,  the  Board  proposed  the  holding  of  a  semi- 
annual meeting,  in  New  York,  during  the  sessions  of 
the  Synod  of  New  York  and  New  Jersey.  Should  this 
plan  not  prove  acceptable,  they  proposed  that  each  of 
the  societies  ^^  request  the  General  Asseml)ly,  which  is- 
to  convene  in  May  next,  to  appoint  an  Education  Board 
of  the  General  Assembly  of  the  Presbyterian  Church, 
in  the  United  States  of  America ;  and  that,  in  case  such 
a  Board  shall  be  established,  each  society  shall  alter  its 
style,  so  as  to  become  auxiliary  to  said  Board." 

These  propositions  were  immediately  communicated 
to  tlie  New  York  Society ;  but  the  response  was  not  in 
the  spirit  anticipated.  The  New  York  Board  replied 
that,  as  to  these  propositions,  they  "  have  not  found  in 
them  that  appearance  of  conciliation  they  had  been  led 
^  to  expect ;"  and  that,  as  the  Philadelphia  Board  "  could 
not  be  ignorant  of  the  views  of  this  Board,  it  may  be 
matter  of  conjecture,  what  could  be  the  motive,  in  sub- 
mitting a  plan  of  union,  which  yields  nothing  to  their 
brethren."  They  intimate  that  it  was  incautiously,  "  in 
a  moment  of  anxiety,  and  to  prevent  division,"  that  "  a 
number  of  members  of  this  Board  offered  to  the 
brethren  at  Princeton,  to  include  the  theological  course." 
But,  in  view,  especially,   of  doctrinal  differences,  they 


THE   EDUCATION    QUESTION.  289 

ire,  now,  clecidedly  of  the  opinion  that  the  object  of  the 
society  ^^  ought  to  be  exclusively  to  assist  indigent  and 
3ious  young  men,  destined  to  the  gospel  ministry,  in 
icquiring  an  academical  education/' , 

To  the  proposal,  that  the  AsseAibly  be  petitioned  to 
irect  a  Board,  they  replied  that  their  Society,  had  ^^  so 
xir  pledged  itself  to  the  public,  in  the  choice  of  its 
)fficers,  and  in  the  organization  of  auxiliary  societies, 
ind  executive  committees,  that  it  would  be  incompatible 
•vith  that  pledge,  to  abandon  the  essential  features  of  its 
constitution,  or  to  becGime,  itself,  auxiliary  to  any  other 
)ody." 

The  New  York  plan,  of  abandoning  candidates,  when 
;hey  were  about  to  enter  upon  their  theological  studies, 
vas  a  scheme,  palpably,  contrived  to  render  these  two 
locieties  mere  feeders  to  the  American  Education  So- 
'iety  and  the  New  England  Theological  Seminaries. 
Che  pledge,  Avhich  rendered  it  impossible  that  the  New 
i!"ork  society  should  become  auxiliary  to  the  Assem- 
)ly's  Board,  proved  no  obstacle  to  a  subsequent 
ubordination,  and  ultimate  union  with  the  American 
society. 

In  a  final  review  of  these  negotiations,  the  Philadel- 
)hia  Board  remarked  that  it  augured  ill  for  the  peace 
,nd  prosperity  of  our  Church,  "  to  hear  our  brethren 
)lead  difference  in  theological  views,  as  a  reason  for 
imiting  the  object. — And  have  matters  come  to  this 
)ass,  that  members  of  the  same  Church  cannot  associate, 
n  assisting  young  men  in  their  theological  education  ? 
fVhy  can  they  not  associate  ?  Is  not  the  Confession  of 
^aith  a  basis  wide  enough  for  us  to  walk  together,  in 
)eace?     All  the  ministers  and  elders  belonging  to  this 

25  • 


290  HISTOEY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL.      ' 

Board  have  professed  ^  sincerely  to  receive  and  adopt 
the  Confession  as  containing  the  system  of  doctrine 
taught  in  the  Holy  Scriptures/  And  the  ministers  and 
elders  belonging  to  the  other  Board  have  made  the 
same  profession.  We  are  willing  to  go,  heart  and  hand, 
with  our  brethren,  in  supporting  the  doctrines  contained 
in  our  Confession.  Are  they  willing?  ...  If  they 
are  afraid  to  trust  the  matter  in  the  hands  of  the 
supreme  .judicatory  of  our  Church,  this  Board  have 
more  confidence  in  the  wisdom  and  integrity  of  that 
venerable  body.'^  , 

The  Philadelphia  Board,  further,  as  an  act  of  justice 
to  themselves,  informed  the  New  York  society  that 
they  "  would  willingly  have  conceded  the  principle  of 
alternation  in  the  anniversaries,  rather  than  prevent  a 
union.'^ 

So  ended  this  correspondence.  At  the  meeting  of 
the  General  Assembly,  in  May,  1819,  an  overture  came 
in,  for  the  organization  of  a  Board  of  Education.  It 
was  referred  to  a  committee,  of  five;  every  man  of 
which,  but  one,  belonged  to  that  class  of  moderates,  who 
opposed  the  decisive  maintenance  of  the  principles  and 
polity  of  the  Church.  They  reported  a  constitution  for 
a  General  Board,  which  was  adopted  by  the  Assembly. 
And,  so  far,  the  "  Calvinists'^  of  the  Church  seemed  to 
have  succeeded.  But  the  Board  was  left  so  entirely 
destitute  of  resources,  and  the  means  of  obtaining  them ; 
and  so  restricted  in  its  functions  and  objects,  that  the 
apparent  success,  availed  nothing.  The  voluntary 
societies  availed  themselves,  most  diligently,  of  the 
interval,  during  which  the  Board  had  existence  without 
powers.      In   1821,   it  applied   to   the   Assembly   for 


THE   EDUCATION    QUESTION.  291 

authority  to  employ  agents  to  solicit  funds,  and  fulfill 
the  designs  of  the  organization.  But  the  Assembly 
found  it  "  inexpedient,  for  want  of  time,  to  act"  on  the 
application. 

In  1824,  that  judicatory,  was  requested  "to  authorize 
the  Board  of  Education  to  select  such  young  men  as 
are  contemplated  by  the  constitution  of  the  Board,  for 
the  gospel  ministry,  and  make  provision  for  their  sup- 
port." For  five  years,- the  Board  had  existed  without 
this  power !  The  request  was,  at  length,  granted,  and 
the  Board  began  to  exist,  as  a  power  for  usefulness. 

Still,  however,  there  was  a  most  deplorable  want  of 
efficiency,  in  the  management.  From  1824  till  1829, 
the  duties  of  Corresponding  Secretary  were  performed 
by  the  Rev.  Dr.  Ely,  in  connection  with  the  multipli- 
city of  his  pastoral  and  other  labors.  The  Rev.  Wil- 
liam Neill,  D.D.,  was  then  called  to  that  office.  His 
second  report,  was  made  in  May,  1831.  It  exhibited 
sixty-five  beneficiaries  on  the  roll ;  the  treasury  in  debt ; 
i\f)  funds  on  hand,  and  no  attempt  made,  nor  plan 
proposed,  to  supply  the  deficiency.  A  committee  was 
appointed  by  the  Assembly,  to  report  on  the  expediency 
of  making  any  alterations  in  the  organization  of  the 
Board.  A  member  of  this  committee,  the  Rev.  Moses  ^y^ 
Chase,  of  Western  New  York,  contemptuously  re- 
marked, that  the  Board  was  dead,  and  it  would  be  well 
to  leave  its  burial  to  the  Philadelphia  brethren.  The 
suggestion  was,  in  the  same  spirit,  acquiesced  in,  by  the 
party  which  was  a  majority  in  that  Assembly,  and  now 
began  to  be  designated  as  the  New  School.  The  opi:)or- 
tunity  thus  given  was  seized  u])on  by  the  Old  School 
party ;  who,  thereupon,  proposed  an  enlargement  of  the 


292  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

Board,  which  was  granted.  They  were,  also,  allowed 
to  make  their  own  nominations  for  the  vacancies,  and 
the  names  proposed  were  elected.  At  the  first  meeting 
of  the  reorganized  Board,  Dr.  Neill  resigned  his  office. 
On  the  next  day,  the  8th  of  June,  the  Rev.  Dr.  John 
Breckinridge  was  elected  his  successor.  He  accepted, 
upon  condition  that  $10,000  were,  in  the  first  place,  put 
into  the  treasury ;  and  that  the  Board  should  make  it 
the  basis  of  future  operations,  "to  receive,  at  all  hazards, 
every  fit  candidate,  who  may  come,  regularly  recom- 
mended; trusting  to  God  and  his  Church  to  sustain  it 
in  redeeming  the  pledge.'^ 

These  conditions  were  complied  with,  and  the  policy 
thus  inaugurated  by  Dr.  Breckinridge,  and  the  vigor 
infused  into  all  its  operations,  by  the  personal  energies 
of  that  eminent  servant  of  Christ,  at  once  lifted  the 
Board  out  of  the  depth  into,  which  it  had  fallen ;  and 
started  it  forward  on  a  career  of  prosj^erity  and  use- 
fulness. 

Such  is  the  first  chapter  in  the  history  of  a  succession 
of  persistent  plans,  designed  to  bind  our  Church,  hand 
and  foot, — to  "  liberalize"  and  corrupt  her  divine  and 
saving  theology,  and  to  enervate  and  subsidize  the 
resources  and  efficiency  of  her  scriptural  polity. 

We  have  seen  the  energy  and  zeal,  displayed  by  the 
Hopkinsian  party,  in  its  endeavor  to  take  charge  of  the 
education  of  the  rising  ministry ;  and  the  unfavorable 
light  in  which  they  viewed  the  Seminary  at  Princeton. 
In  such  circumstances,  they  did  not  overlook  so  evident 
a  feature  of  policy,  as  the  establishment  of  a  Theologi- 
cal Seminary.  The  importance  of  such  an  institution 
had  been  the  subject  of  private  conversation  for  some 


THE   EDUCATION   QUESTION.  293 

time.  In  February,  1818,  it  was  proposed  to  the  Synod 
of  Geneva,  which  was,  at  the  time,  the  sole  offspring 
and  representative  in  New  York,  of  the  Plan  of  Union. 
The  Synods  of  Genesee  and  Utica  were  formed,  subse- 
quently. After  discussion,  the  Synod  resolved  to  ask 
the  advice  of  the  Assembly.  That  body  replied  that 
it  was  not  prepared  to  give  any  opinion  or  advice,  on 
the  subject  of  the  overture,  "which  contemplates  the 
establishment  of  an  academical  and  theological  seminary; 
believing  the  Synod  are  the  best  judges  of  what  may 
be  their  duty,  in  this  important  business." 

At  a  special  meeting  of  the  Synod,  held  in  Auburn, 
in  August  of  the  same  year,  it  was  determined  to  pro- 
ceed at  once  to  establish  a  theological  seminary ;  and, 
on  certain  conditions,  to  locate  it  at  Auburn.  The  con- 
ditions were  promptly  complied  with,  and  the  institu- 
tion so  located.  Application  was  then  made  to  the 
Legislature,  for  a  charter,  which  was  obtained,  in 
April,  1820. 

This  charter  appoints  certain  persons,  and  their  suc- 
cessors, "  Trustees  of  the  Theological  Seminary  of  Au- 
burn, in  the  State  of  New  York."  To  them  are  entrusted 
the  immediate  care  and  management  of  the  funds  and 
property,  for  the  uses  of  the  institution ;  but  "  in  such 
way  and  manner,  only,"  "  as  shall  be  appointed  by  the 
Board  of  Commissioners  hereinafter  mentioned." 

"  A  representation,  annually  to  be  chosen,  of  two 
clergymen  and  one  layman,  from  each  of  the  following 
Presbyteries,  and  such  other  Presbyteries  as  shall  here- 
after associate  with  the  said  Synod,  for  the  purpose, — 
to  wit : —  .  .  .  shall  compose  a  Board  of  Commission- 
ers, who  shall  have  the  general  superintendence,  man- 

25* 


294  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

agement,  and  controJ,  of  the  aforesaid  institution ;  and. 
who  shall  have  authority  to  fill  the  places  of  the  afore- 
said Trustees,  as  they  shall  become  vacant ;  to  appoint 
the  tutors,  professors  and  other  officers  of  the  said  insti- 
tution ;  to  fix  and  determine  the  salary  and  other  com- 
pensation of  the  said  officers  ;  to  authorize  and  direct  all 
such  appropriations  of  their  funds  as  they  shall  think 
proper;  to  make  by-laws  and  regulations,  for  them- 
selves ;  to  choose  their  own  president  and  other  officers ; 
and  to  determine  what  number  of  their  Board  shall 
form  a  quorum,  for  doing  business/^ 

Under  this  charter,  the  Boards  of  Trustees  and  of 
Commissioners  were  constituted,  and  on  May  2d,  1821, 
the  institution  was  organized  by  the  election  of  the 
Kev.  Matthew  La  Rue  PeiTine,  D.  D.,  of  New  York, 
the  Rev.  Henry  Mills,  D.  D.,  of  Woodbridge,  New  Jer- 
sey, and  the  Rev.  Dirck  C.  Lansing,  of  Auburn,  pro- 
fessors. The  last  of  these,  was  a  temporary  appoint- 
ment. Two  years  after,  the  chair  of  theology  was  con- 
ferred on  the  Rev.  James  Richards,  D.  D.,  of  Newark, 
New  Jersey,  who  was  inducted  into  office,  on  the  23d 
of  October,  1823. 

Whilst  the  Hopkinsians  of  New  York  and  New  Jer- 
sey were  rearing  the  walls  of  Auburn,  those  of  Tennes- 
see were  laying  the  foundations  of  Maryville. 

The  Hopinsianism  of  East  Tennessee  was  of  sporadic 
growth.  The  case  of  the  Rev.  Dr.  Hezekiah  Balch, 
who  was  tried  before  the  Assembly,  in  1798,  on  charges 
of  doctrinal  error,  has  already  been  noticed  in  these 
pages.  Dr.  Balch  had  acquired  his  new  sentiments  in 
the  course  of  a  tour  to  New  England,  in  1795,  on  be- 
half of  Greenville  College,  of  which  he  was  the  founder 


THE   EDUCATION   QUESTION.  295 

and  president.  As  he  was  a  zealous  propagandist,  his 
Hopkinsian  sentiments  Avere  soon  diffused  to  a  consider- 
able extent  among  his  ministerial  brethren,  but  few  of 
Avhom  possessed  sufficient  theological  learning,  to  render 
them  altogether  proof  against  such  specious  innova- 
tions. And,  as  he  remained  at  the  head  of  the  college, 
until  his  death,  in  1810,  and  was  succeeded  by  his 
friend  and  associate,  the  Rev.  Dr.  Coffin,  a  disciple  of  the 
same  school,  the  result  was  the  dissemination  of  his  theo- 
logical sentiments  throughout  East  Tennessee,  by  means 
of  the  alumni  of  the  college,  who  became  the  pastors  of 
the  churches.  Such  was  the  manner  in  which,  through 
the  casual  visit  of  an  individual  to  New  England,  the 
speculations  which  have  corruj)ted  the  theology  of  the 
East  gained  footing  in  the  only  locality  which  they  ever 
possessed  in  the  South.  The  similar  tendency,  devel- 
oped at  a  later  period,  in  South  Carolina,  in  the  publi- 
cations of  the  Rev.  W.  C.  Davis,  and  the  apparent  sym- 
pathy of  his  Presbytery,  was  quickly  suppressed,  by 
the  firm  and  judicious  exercise  of  discipline. 

In  1819,  the  SyAod  of  Tennessee  determined  to  found 
a  theological  seminary.  The  institution  was  opened  in 
1822,  under  the  charge  of  the  Rev.  Dr.  Gideon  Black- 
burn, who  was  a  pupil  of  the  Rev.  Dr.  Robert  Hender- 
son, Dr.  Balch's  son-in-law.  Dr.  Blackburn  was  an 
ardent  disciple  of  the  school  of  Hopkins,  and  a  devoted 
advocate  of  voluntary  societies,  and  enemy  of  the  Boards 
of  the  Church.* 

*  As  Dr.  Blackburn  journeyed  from  Pittsburgli,  after  the  Assembly 
of  1836,  he  gave  my  late  venerated  friend,  the  Rev.  Dr.  George  W. 
Janvier,  wlio  was  of  the  company,  his  interpretation  of  the  three  un- 
clean spirits,  like  frogs,  which  John  saw.  They  were  certain  great 
errors  in  the  Church,  one  of  which  was,  ecclesiastical  Boards ! 


296  HISTOEY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

He  was  succeeded,  in  this  post,  by  the  Rev.  Dr.  Isaac 
Anderson.  The  latter  had  been  early  trained  in  the 
faith  of  his  Presbyterian  ancestors.  But  coming,  as  a 
student  of  theology,  under  the  private  tuition  of  Dr. 
Blackburn,  some  years  before  the  establishing  of  the 
seminary,  the  latter  set  himself  with  extraordinary 
earnestness  and  diligence,  and  with  complete  success, 
to  turn  him  from  the  doctrines  of  his  youth,  and  estab- 
lish him  in  the  better  way  devised  by  the  divine  of 
Newport. 


CHAPTER   XIX. 

OUR   MISSIONS   AND   THE   AMERICAN    BOARD. 

The  United  Foreign  Missionary  Society — Its  missions — Cheering 
repor^t,  in  1825 — Acquisition  of  the  Maumee  mission — Amalgama- 
tion with  the  American  Board — The  terms  rejected  by  the  Assem- 
bly— Appropriation  of  the  Cherokee  mission  by  the  Board — Ac- 
quisition of  the  Chickasaw  mission,  from  the  Synod  of  vSouth  Caro- 
lina and  Georgia — The  Presbyterian  Church  not  new  to  the  work 
of  missions. 

When  the  Board  of  Domestic  Missions  was  erected, 
in  1816,  tlie  committee  which  reported  its  constitution 
to  the  Assembly,  at  the  same  time,  recommended  the 
organization  of  a  Foreign  Missionary  Society,  to  be 
composed  of  members,  not  only  of  our  own,  but,  also,  of 
the  Reformed  Dutch  and  Associate  Reformed  Churches. 
A  committee  was,  therefore,  appointed,  to  correspond 
with  those  churches,  and  endeavor  to  secure*  the  erection 
of  such  an  institution.  The  result  was,  the  organiza- 
tion, in  1817,  of  the  United  Foreign  Missionary  Society, 
which,  although  originated  at  the  suggestion  of  the 
General  Assembly,  and  under  the  patronage  of  the 
three  denominations  named,  was  a  purely  voluntary 
society,  dependent,  in  no  respect,  as  to  its  organization 
and  management,  upon  the  courts  of  the  churches,  by 
which  it  was  orignated  and  sustained. 

It  entered,  however,  with  considerable  efficiency,  upon 

297 


298  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

the  work  to  which  it  was  designated.  The  New  York 
Missionary  Society  transferred  to  it  the  Tuscarora  mis- 
sion, commenced  about  1801,  and  the  Seneca  mission 
originated  in  1811,  both  in  New  York.  The  Northern 
Missionary  Society  surrendered  to  it,  a  mission  at  Fort 
Gratiot,  on  the  river  St.  Clair,  a  little  below  the  outlet 
of  Lake  Huron.  Five  missions  were  established  by 
the  society  itself, — the  Union  mission,  on  Grand  River, 
twenty-five  miles  above  its  junction  with  the  Arkansas, — 
the  Great  Osage  mission,  on  the  Marias  de  Cein,  six 
miles  above  its  entrance  into  the  Osage, — the  Catarau- 
gus  mission  in  New  York ;  the  Mackinaw  mission,  in 
Michigan ;  and  the  Haytian  mission,  at  Port  au  Prince, 
Hayti. 

In  the  annual  report  of  this  society,  for  1825,  it  was 
able  to  present  the  following  flattering  comparison : — 

"  The  American  Board  of  Commissioners  for  Foreign 
Missions,  at  its  eighth  anniversary,  reported  three  mis- 
sionary stations,  twenty  missionaries  and  assistants,  two 
schools,  sixty-four  pagan  children  and  youth,  and  one 
or  two  converts  from  paganism  to  Christianity.  At  its 
fifteenth  anniversary,  celebrated  in  September  last,  the 
same  institution  reported  thirty-three  stations,  one  hun- 
dred and  forty-four  missionaries  and  assistants,  ninety 
schools,  arid  three  thousand  scholars. 

"  At  your  eighth  anniversary,  you  number  eight  mis- 
sions, fifty-five  missionaries  and  assistants,  four  schools, 
two  hundred  and  thirty  pagan  youth,  and  more  than  forty 
converts  to  the  faith  and  hope  of  the  Gospel.  Should 
the  sphere  of  your  operations  be  extended,  in  the  ratio 
which  has  marked  the  progress  of  that  important  society, 
you  will,  in  seven  years,  number  seventy-eight  stations, 


OUR   MISSIONS   AND   THE   AMERICAN   BOARD.     299 

three  hundred  and  ninety-six  missionaries  and  assistants, 
one  hundred  and  eighty  schools,  and  more  than  ten 
thousand  scholars.  To  this  may  be  added, — should  the 
blessing  of  Heaven  descend,  proportionally,  upon  your 
labors,  you  will  behold  a  company  of  more  than  five 
hundred  converts,  rescued,  through  your  instrument- 
ality, from  the  dominion  and  degradation  of  paganism, 
and  rejoicing  in  the  efficiency  of  that  grace,  which  had 
raised  them  to  the  high  and  holy  character  of  children 
of  God,  and  heirs  of  eternal  glory.  Carry  your  view 
forward,  to  the  close  of  a  few  more  septennial  periods, 
and  who  can  estimate  the  amount  of  temporal  and 
spiritual  benefit,  that  may  redound  to  immortal  souls ! 
Who  can  compute  the  amount  of  revenue  of  glory,  that 
may  accrue  to  the  kingdom  of  Immanuel  f^ 

At  the  same  time,  the  report  of  the  treasurer  an- 
nounced an  income  of  $20,975.45 ;  all  expenses  paid ; 
and  a  debt  of  $7,953.19,  with  which  the  year  began, 
reduced  to  $257.62.  And  yet,  with  a  situation  so  favor- 
able and  prospects  so  flattering,  the  Directors  of  this 
society  were  just  about  to  consummate  its  extinction ! 

It  was  whilst  this  society  was  thus  crowned  with  suc- 
cess, and  seeming  to  glow  with  hope  for  the  future,  that, 
in  the  fall  of  1824,  the  Board  of  Trust  of  the  Synod  of 
Pittsburgh  advised,  and  the  Synod  consented  to  accej^t 
overtures  received  from  it,  proposing  correspondence, 
with  a  view  to  becoming  auxiliary. 

The  Synod,  however,  prescribed  the  following  condi- 
tions : — 1 .  That,  until  the  Synod  shall  otherwise  order, 
the  title  to  the  real  estate  at  Maumee  should  remain  in 
it.  2.  The  United  Foreign  Missionary  Society  shall 
establish  a  Board  of  Agency  at  Pittsburgh,  to  attend  to 


300  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

the  missions  of  the  Synod.  3.  The  personal  property, 
already  acquired  by  the  Synod^  and  any  funds  given  by 
it,  for  the  purpose,  to  be  used  in  the  support  of  Indian 
missions. 

Should  the  society  agree  to  these  terms,  and  establish 
an  agency  at  Pittsburgh,  the  Synod,  under  the  name  of 
the  Western  Missionary  Society  was  to  be,  forthwith,  an 
auxiliary  of  the  United  Foreign  Missionary  Society, 
"  to  the  extent  before  described.^^ 

These  conditions  were  unacceptable  to  the  managers 
of  the  United  Foreign  Missionary  Society.  The  Board 
of  Trust,  therefore,  consented  to  further  negotiations; 
and,  finally,  in  June,  1825,  agreed  to  an  arrangement, 
by  which  the  United  Foreign  Missionary  Society  en- 
gaged to  take  the  station  at  Maumee,  under  their  care 
and  exclusive  direction,  '^  and  pay  the  Board  of  Trust 
of  the  Western  Missionary  Society  one  thousand  dol- 
lars, in  cash,  provided,  the  Synod  of  Pittsburgh  shall 
duly  and  legally  convey  and  transfer  to  them  the  said 
station,  with  all  the  real  and  personal  property  of  the 
Board  of  Trust  of  said  society,  thereunto  belonging; 
to  be  the  property,  and  employed  for  the  use  of  said 
United  Foreign  Missionary  Society." 

To  this  arrangement,  the  Synod  yielded  a  reluctant 
consent,  at  its  meeting  in  October,  1825, — a  consent 
which  would,  surely,  not  have  been  given,  could  the 
developments  of  a  few  months  have  been  anticipated. 
The  thousand  dollars,  here  stipulated,  was  not  ^^roposed 
as  adequate  compensation  for  the  property ;  but  was 
merely,  a  consideration,  necessary  to  give  the  contract 
legal  force ;  so  as  to  place  the  whole  matter  beyond  the 
further  control  of  the  Synod. 


OUR   MISSIONS   AND   THE   AMERICAN    BOARD.      301 

Whilst  the  Synod  of  Pittsburgh  was  considering  and 
ratifying  these  terms,  for  the  surrender  of  that  cherished 
and  promising  mission,  the  United  Society  had  already, 
one  month  before,  made  proposals  to  the  American 
Board  of  Commissioners  for  Foreign  Missions  for  the 
transfer  of  all  its  missions  and  property  to  that  society, 
and  its  own  dissolution.  The  ecclesiastical  significance 
of  this  step  is  indicated,  in  the  reasons  adduced  by  the 
commissioners  of  the  Society,  in  conference  with  the 
Board,  in  favor  of  union.  They  stated,  that,  ^Hhe 
spirit  of  controversy  having  subsided,  the  intelligent 
and  candid  of  the  Christian  public  are  all  satisfied  that 
the  same  gospel  which  is  preached  in  the  Middle  and. 
Southern  and  AVestern  States,  is  preached  also  in  the 
Eastern  States. 

"  That  the  missionaries  of  both  societies  preach  pre- 
cisely the  same  gospel  to  the  heathen ;  and  that  the 
same  regulations  are  adopted  by  both,  in  the  manage- 
ment of  missions. 

"  That  both  derive  much  of  their  funds  from  the 
same  churches  and  individuals ;  that  the  great  body  of 
Christians  do  not  perceive  or  make  any  distinction 
between  the  two  institutions ;  and,  consequently,  do  not 
perceive  any  necessity  for  two,  and  regret  the  existence 
of  two ;  and  that  many  churches  and  individuals,  un- 
willing to  evince  a  preference  for  either,  are  thus  pre- 
vented from  acting  promptly  and  contributing  liberally 
to  either.'^ 

The  considerations  here  exhibited,  and  which  were 
the  familiar  reasons  for  incorporating  the  executive 
organizations  of  our  Church  with  the  New  England 
Societies,  never,  by  any  accident,  occurred,  to  prevent 

26 


302  HISTORY    OF    THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

the  organization  of  the  latter,  in  view  of  the  prior  ex- 
istence of  the  others ;  nor  to  induce  the  amalgamation 
of  the  Congregational  Societies  with  the  Boards  of  the 
Church.     The  argument  was- only  good  in  one  direction. 

These  reasons  for  the  transfer  were  not,  however, 
urged  upon  the  Assembly.  To  it,  the  plea  was,  a  lack 
of  funds.  Says  Zechariah  Lewis,  Esq., — '^  So  far  as  I 
know,  this  was  the  only  inducement.  In  May,  1825, 
having  served  the  Board  faithfully  and  gratuitously, 
for  five  years,  as  their  principal  Secretary,  and  finding 
that  my  health  began  to  yield  under  my  heavy  labors, 
and  having  the  satisfaction  of  seeing  the  Society,  for 
the  first  time,  free  from  debt ;  I  resigned  my  office,  in 
favor  of  Mr.  Crane,  and  removed  my  family  to  the 
country  for  the  summer.  On  my  return  to  the  city,  in 
September,  I  found,  to  my  astonishment,  that  the 
drafts  upon  the  Board,  and  other  expenses,  had,  in  four 
months,  exceeded  the  receipts,  by  nearly  ten  thousand 
dollars ;  that  the  Board,  as  well  as  the  Treasurer,  had 
become  alarmed ;  that  they  had  determined  to  offer  the 
whole  concern  to  the  Eastern  Board,  on  condition  that 
it  would  assume  our  debt;  and  that  Commissioners  had 
gone  to  lay  the  proposition  before  that  Board,  then  in 
session."* 

Ui3on  this.  Dr.  Green,  justly,  remarks,  that  "if  the 
Society  was  out  of  debt,  entirely,  but  four  months 
before  the  transfer ;  and  if  the  amount  of  the  debt,  at 
the  time  it  took  place,  did  not  exceed  ten  thousand 
dollars ;  and  if,  as  we  know  was  the  fact,  three  respect- 
al)le  denominations  were  morally  bound  and  even 
solemnly  pledged,  to  see  the  debt  discharged,  it  cannot 
*  Dr.  Green's  History  of  Presbyterian  Missions,  p.  75. 


OUR   MISSIONS   AND    THE   AMERICAN   BOARD.      303 

be  credited  that  there  were  not  other,  and  more  power- 
ful motives,  prompting  to  the  transfer,  than  the  fact 
that  the  United  Foreign  Missionary  Society  owed  ten 
thousand  dollars/^  In  confirmation  of  this  view,  it 
may  be  added  that  the  debt  accrued  at  a  season  of  the 
year  when  all  experience,  then,  as  well  as  since,  taught 
the  Treasurer  to  expect  limited  receipts ;  that  it  was  in 
the  midst  of  this  pressure  and  alarm  of  debt  that  the 
Society  negotiated  the  purchase  of  the  mission  of  the 
Synod  of  Pittsburgh,  at  the  expense  of  $1000,  making 
a  part  of  the  debt ;  that  this  was  done  after  declining 
the  plan  of  the  Synod,  for  a  relation  to  be  formed  with- 
out any  such  expense ;  and  that  the  property  of  the  one 
mission  thus  acquired,  was  sufficient  of  itself  to  have 
paid  the  entire  debt. 

The  motives  governing  the  whole  transaction,  and 
which,  especially,  caused  the  anxiety  of  the  Directors 
of  the  United  Society  to  get  absolute  control  over  the 
mission  of  the  Synod  of  Pittsburgh,  may  be  surmised, 
from  the  insertion  of  a  provision,  in  the  plan  of  amal- 
gamation with  the  American  Board,  designed  to  bind 
the  whole  Presbyterian  Church  to  the  permanent  sup- 
port of  the  Board.  It  proposed  that  ^^  the  highest 
judicatories,  of  the  Presbyterian  Church,  and  of  the 
Peformed  Dutch  Church,*  will  recommend  the  Ameri- 
can Board  of  Commissioners  for  Foreign  Missions,  as  a 
National  Institution,  and  entitled  to  the  warm  support 
and  efficient  patronage  of  the  Churches  under  their 
respective  jurisdictions."f 

*  The  Associate  Reformed  Synod  had  been  united,  in  1822,  with 
the  General  Assembly. 

f  See  the  terms.  Preliminary,  and  Permanent,  in  the  Digest,  p.  339. 


304  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

The  proposal  of  union  was  immediately  accepted,  by 
the  American  Board.  The  Directors  of  the  United 
Foreign  Missionary  Society  unanimously  adopted  it ; 
and  the  Society,  at  its  annual  meeting,  in  May,  1826, 
cordially  approved  and  recommended  it  to  the  General 
Assembly,  for  its  sanction.  In  such  circumstances,  the 
Assembly  had  no  alternative.  To  compel  a  society  to 
continue  its  operations,  which  unanimously  sought  ex- 
tinction, and  had  already  allowed  a  considerable  debt  to 
accumulate  through  inaction,  pending  these  negotia- 
tions, was  out  of  the  question.  The  subject  was 
referred  to  a  committee,  which  brought  in  a  report 
recommending  amalgamation,  "  on  the  terms  specified." 
"  The  Rev.  Mr.  McCalla,'^  says  Dr.  Janeway,  ''  began 
the  debate.  He  spoke  plainly,  and  was  insulted,  by 
many  members  passing  out  of  the  room  occupied  by  the 
Assembly,  into  the  gallery  of  the  church.  They  went 
out  between  him  and  the  Moderator, — Dr.  McAuley. 
Seeing  the  impropriety,  Dr.  Junkin  said, — *  Moderator, 
do  you  see  what  is  occurring  ?'  The  reply  was,  *  I 
know  what  I  am  about.^  When  Bro.  McCalla,  had 
finished,  I  arose,  to  speak  a  few  words.  There  was  a 
rush  of  the  members,  who  had  gone  out,  into  the  room. 
I  paused,  till  they  were  seated.  After  expressing  my 
regret,  on  account  of  the  necessity  of  the  case,  arising 
from  the  debt  of  the  U.  F.  M.  S., — I  said,  ^  There  is 
one  term,  to  which  I  neither  can,  nor  will,  give  my 
assent, — and  that  is,  to  recommend  the  A.  B.  C.  F. 
M.,  as  a  national  society, — although  I  should  stand 
alone  on  the  floor.'  I,  therefore,  moved  that  the  term 
should  be  stricken  out.  For  the  motion,  I  assigned 
three  reasons.     Then,  Dr.  Alexander,  who  was  sitting  at 


OUR   MISSIONS   AND   THE   AMERICAN   BOARD.      305 

some  distance  on  my  right  hand,  said,  ^  Let  all  the 
terms  go/  I  hesitated  to  make  a  motion  for  the  pur- 
pose. While  deliberating  on  the  probability  of  its  carry- 
ing, Mr.  Zachariah  Lewis,  a  member  of  the  committee 
of  the  U.  F.  M.  S.,  who  was  sitting  near  me, — anxious 
for  the  amalgamation,  rose  while  I  was  yet  standing, 
and  said,  '  Moderator,  I  make  the  motion  to  strike 
out  all  the  termsJ  Then,  I  said,  ^  Moderator,  I  accept 
that,  as  my  motion,' — and  took  my  seat.  To  my 
astonishment,  the  motion  was  carried,  with  only  two  or 
tliree  dissenting  voices. 

"  Afterward,  a  member  rose  and  observed, — ^  We  have 
saddled  the  A.  B.  C.  F.  M.  with  a  debt,  and,  have  not 
even  recommended  our  churches  to  aid  in  extinguishing 
it.  I  hold  in  my  hand,  a  recommendation  for  the  con- 
tributions of  the  churches,  Avhich  you  may  recall  next 
year,  if  you  don't  like  it.'  It  was  adopted.  Thus,  our 
Church  was  saved  from  being  deprived  of  the  privilege 
and  duty  of  carrying  on  the  work  of  foreign  missions."* 

Dr.  Janeway's  "  three  reasons"  were, — that  the  en- 
dorsement of  the  Board  as  a  national  society  would  be 
offensive  to  other  denominations  ; — that,  the  denomina- 
tions which  sustained  the  Society  and  the  Board  did  not, 
together,  constitute  a  majority  of  the  religious  public ; 
— and,  consequently,  that,  if  the  Assembly  were  to 
denominate  it,  a  national  society,  it  would  dishonor 
itself  by  falsehood. 

Beside  striking  out  all  the  terms,  the  Assembly  further 
amended  the  paper  by  declaring  its  "  consent  to'^  instead 
of  "  approval  of"  the  amalgamation. 

The  casual  recommendation  given  to  the  Board,  in 

*  MS.  Letter  from  Dr.  Janeway  to  the  author,  of  July  21,  1852. 
26  * 


306  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

the  closing  resolution,  was  afterward  used,  as  we  shall 
see,  as  a  recognition  of  the  claim  of  nationality,  which 
was  so  expressly  repudiated  by  the  Assembly. 

The  Synod  of  the  Reformed  Dutch  Church  took 
action  on  the  amalgamation  precisely  coincident  with 
that  of  the  Assembly.  It  acquiesced  in  it,  with  the 
express  declaration,  "  that  no  pledge  of  support  or 
recommendation  to  the  patronage  of  our  churches  is 
understood  to  be  implied  in  the  consent  of  this  Synod." 

Already,  fifteen  years  before,  that  Board  had  inexcusa- 
bly taken  possession  of  one  of  the  early  missions  of  the 
Assembly.  In  1803,  the  Rev.  Gideon  Blackburn,  whilst 
in  attendance  on  the  General  Assembly,  was  invited  to  a 
conference  with  the  Committee  of  Missions,  and  tendered 
an  appointment,  as  missionary  to  the  Cherokees.  This, 
he  accepted ;  and,  soon,  the  foundations  were  laid  for 
that  Christian  civilization,  by  which  that  people  are 
now  characterized.  But,  in  the  midst  of  a  most  pros- 
perous career,  Mr.  Blackburn  withdrew  from  the 
service,  in  1810.  The  Committee  had  no  thought  of 
abandoning  the  mission,  on  which  $8000  had  been 
expended,  with  the  most  encouraging  results.  But, 
whilst  they  were  looking  for  a  suitable  successor  to 
Mr.  Blackburn,  the  Rev.  Cyrus  Kingsbury  passed 
through  Philadelphia,  under  commission  from  the 
American  Board,  to  occupy  that  field.  He  waited  on 
the  chairman  of  the  Committee,  to  learn  whetlier  they 
had  any  objections  to  his  mission.  He  was  informed 
that  the  Committee  could  not  object  to  his  laboring  for 
the  benefit  of  that  people ;  but  was  distinctly  apprised 
of  their  design  to  resume  the  mission,  as  soon  as  suit- 
able missionaries  could  be  obtained.    The  claims  of  our 


OUR   MISSIONS   AND   THE   AMERICAN   BOARD.      307 

Church  were,  however,  entirely  disregarded,  and  the  field, 
which  was  ripening  to  the  harvest,  since  so  abundantly 
realized,  w'as,  at  once,  occupied  by  the  Board.  Nor 
did  that  body,  in  any  of  its  reports,  ever  make  the 
slightest  acknowledgement  of  its  indebtedness  to  the 
Assembly,  and  its  missionary,  for  the  happy  results 
which  it  was  privileged  to  chronicle,  on  that  field. 

The  appropriation  of  this  mission  took  place,  when 
the  American  Board  was  but  five  or  six  years  old, 
and  when  "  the  world  was  all  before  them  wdiere  to 
choose.'^ 

Upon  the  amalgamation  of  the  United  Foreign  Mis- 
sionary Society  with  the  Board,  there  still  remained  one 
Presbyterian  Mission,  not  absorbed.  The  Synod  of  the 
Carolinas,  in  1802,  had  commenced  a  mission,  among 
the  Indians  of  that  region ;  which  was  ultimately  fixed 
among  the  Chickasaws,  and  had  been  successfully  prose- 
cuted, until  the  time  of  that  union.  The  acquisition  of 
this  mission,  by  the  American  Board,  was  now  easily 
accomplished.  The  matter  was  brought  before  the 
Synod  of  South  Carolina  and  Georgia.  That  body  had 
fallen  heir  to  the  mission,  upon  the  division  of  the 
Synod  of  the  Carolinas.  At  its  sessions,  in  1828,  a 
proposition  for  transfer  was  adopted,  and  at  the  same 
time,  a  Committee  appointed,  to  publish  an  address  to 
the  churches,  on  the  subject. 

"  The  American  Board," — So  ran  this  address, — "  is, 
truly,  a  national  institution.  In  its  support,  are  now 
cordially  united,  our  own  Church,  the  Associate  Re- 
formed, the  Dutch  Reformed,  and  the  Congregational 
Churches  of  New  England ;  forming  a  body  of  Chris- 
tians, vastly  more  numerous   and  efficient  than  any  in 


308  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW  SCHOOL. 

America.  Besides,  the  operations  of  that  Board  are 
extensive  and  magnificent,  in  a  degree  wholly  unexam- 
pled on  this  continent." 

Thus,  with  pseans,  was  celebrated  the  finishing  stroke 
of  a  j)olicy,  which,  for  a  time,  stripped  the  Presbyterian 
Church,  of  every  mission,  which,  -with  prayer  and- toil, 
she  had  established  among  the  heathen ;  and  transferred 
their  control  to  a  body  over  which  the  Church  of  God 
has  not  the  slightest  official  authority.  We  have 
already  seen  the  slender  ground  on  which  was  founded 
the  assei'tion,  that  the  Board  was  sustained,  as  a  national 
society,  by  the  cordial  support  of  the  Presbyterian  As- 
sociate Reformed,  and  Reformed  Dutch  Churches. 

It  is  customary  to  celebrate  the  organization  of  the 
American  Board,  as  the  origin  of  American  missions  to 
the  heathen.  It  is  true,  that  the  origin  of  that  Board 
may,  j  astly,  be  regarded  as  the  era  of  missions,  in  New 
England.  And  it  is,  farther  to  be  admitted,  that,  by 
virtue  of  its  abundant  treasury,  and  the  process  of  ab- 
sorption above  illustrated,  it  quickly  assumed  a  most 
commanding  position,  and  acquired  control  over  the 
work,  on  a  much  larger  scale  than  ever  before  realized. 
For  whatever,  of  advancement  to  the  cause  of  missions 
and  the  promulgation  of  the  gospel,  has  hence  resulted, 
let  God  be  glorified. 

But  let  it  never  be  forgotten,  that  the  Church  which 
we  love  was  laboring,  diligently,  in  this  blessed  cause, 
years  before  that  Board  had  existence ;  and  that  some 
of  the  missions,  which  have  most  honored  the  Board 
and  cheered  the  hearts  of  those  who  pray, — ^^  Thy 
kingdom  come," — were  founded,  before  her  organiza- 
tion was  conceived,  by  the  labors,  the  contributions  and 


OUR   MISSIONS   AND   THE   AMERICAN   BOARD.      309 

the  prayers  of  the  fathers  of  our  Church;  Avhose  deep 
poverty  abounded  unto  the  riches  of  their  liberality. 
When  the  Presbyterian  Church  shall  cease  to  be  devoted 
to  the  cause  of  missions,  she  will  be  derelict,  not  to  her 
duty  only,  but  to  all  her  holiest  traditions.  She  will 
lose  her  identity  and  cease  to  be  herself. 


CHAPTER   XX. 

THE    HOME   MISSIONARY    QUESTION. 

Growth  of  the  Church — Erection  of  the  Board  of  Missions — Origin 
of  the  American  Home  Missionary  Society — It  opposes  reorganiza- 
tion of  the  Board — Correspondence  between  the  Board  and  the 
Society — Arrogant  ckiims  of  the  Society — Plan  to  amalgamate  the 
Board  and  Society — Kejected  by  the  Board — Persistence  of  the 
Society — Prosperity  of  the  Board — Proposal  for  union  in  the  West 
— Rejected  by  the  Assembly — Question  as  to  Hopkinsian  mission- 
aries— Dr.  Peters'  visit  to  Cincinnati — Correspondence  of  that 
Presbvterv  and  the  Board. 

For  nearly  a  century  and  a  quarter,  the  various  courts 
of  the  Presbyterian  Church  had  been  vigorously  en- 
gaged in  the  work  of  domestic  missions.  As  the  result 
of  her  exertions,  thus  conducted,  she  had  grown  from 
the  little  handful  which  first  convened  in  the  church  in 
Buttonwood  street,  in  1705,  to  a  vast  body,  having 
under  the  care  of  its  General  Assembly,  sixteen 
Synods,  ninety  Presbyteries,  fourteen  hundred  and 
seventy-nine  ministers  and  licentiates,  and  about  one 
hundred  and  sixty  thousand  communicants,  distri- 
buted among  eighteen  hundred  and  eighty-seven 
churches. 

In  1816,  the  Committee  was  erected  into  the  Board 
of  Missions,  and  its  powers  greatly  enlarged.  And  yet, 
for  several  years  afterward,  the  receipts  into  its  treasury 

310 


THE    HOME   MISSIONARY   QUESTION.  311 

were  gradually  declining.  In  1816,  they  amounted  to 
$4948.  In  1828,  they  had  fallen  to  $2996.  The 
causes  of  this  are  readily  traceable.  From  the  date  of 
the  controversy,  in  the  New  York  Young  Men's  Mis- 
sionary Society,  in  1816,  the  energies  of  the  Hopkinsian 
party  had  been  devoted  to  the  organization  and  support 
of  voluntary  societies  for  missions  ;  in  which  they  could 
enjoy  an  indulgence  to  theological  aberrations,  which 
they  could  not  expect  from  the  Assembly's  Board.  The 
Moderates,  or  Peace  men,  were  induced,  by  a  false  liber- 
ality, to  co-operate,  largely.  In  these  enterprises.  The 
result  was,  a  number  of  local  missionary  societies ;  by 
which  the  resources  were  absorbed,  and  the  missionaries 
sustained,  which  would,  otherwise,  have  been  available 
for  the  Assembly's  Board. 

In  1822,  a  number  of  these  societies  were  joined  in 
forming  the  United  Domestic  Missionary  Society.  They 
had,  already,  twenty-nine  missionaries  in  the  field,  who 
immediately  came  under  the  charge  of  the  United 
Society.  In  the  fourth  annual  rej^ort  of  this  society, 
made  in  1826,  it  announced  an  Income  of  $11,804,  and 
148  churches  aided  in  the  support  of  127  missionaries. 
At  this  anniversary,  the  society  adopted  a  new  constitu- 
tion, and  resolved  itself  into  the  American  Home  Mis- 
sionary Society.  This  institution  was  planned,  in  a 
meeting  of  delegates  from  the  New  England  churches, 
held  in  Boston,  early  in  the  same  year.  They  selected 
the  United  Domestic  Missionary  Society,  to  carry  Into 
execution  tlie  plan  so  formed.  At  their  request,  that 
Society  adopted  the  new  constitution,  thus  devised,  and 
assumed  the  new  name. 

The  connection  of  this  movement  is  worthy  of  notice. 


312  HISTORY    OF    THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

It  is  given  by  a  writer  in  the  New  Haven  Christian 
Spectator.  After  alkiding  to  the  origin  of  the  United 
Foreign  Missionary  Society^  he  states  that  "after  the 
experiment  of  a  few  years^  it  appeared,  that  the  great 
body  of  those,  in  all  parts  of  the  country,  who  cared 
for  the  missionary  enterprise,  had  a  strong  confidence  in 
the  skill  and  fidelity  of  the  committee  at  Boston ;  and 
the  United  Foreign  Missionary  Society,  with  all  its 
debts,  engagements,  and  encumbrances,  was,  after  care- 
ful deliberation,  and  with  the  full  consent  of  the  judi- 
catories, aforesaid,  merged  in  the  American  Board  of 
Commissioners  for  Foreign  Missions.  While  this  union 
was  in  progress,  and  was  on  the  point  of  being  con- 
summated, the  American  Home  Missionary  Society  Avas 
formed,  in  the  city  of  New  York.''*  The  amalgama- 
tion, in  the  one  case,  and  organization,  in  the  other, 
were  parts  of.  the  same  plan,  to  subsidize  our  Church, 
in  the  interest  of  New  England. 

No  sooner  was  the  Society  organized,  than,  under  the 
^management  of  its  Corrcoijonding  Secretary,  the  Rev. 
Dr.  Absalom  Peters,  it  aspired  to  be,  in  the  domestic 
field,  what  the  American  Board  was  just  about  to 
become,  for  the  heathen  world.  In  the  circular,  calling 
the  convention,  by  which  the  reorganization  of  the 
United  Society  was  accomplished,  this  idea  was  dis- 
tinctly presented.  "  We  cannot  entertain  a  doubt,  that, 
in  the  good  providence  of  God,  American  Christians, 
of  the  Congregational,  Presbyterian,  and  Dutch  Re- 
formed denominations,  are  prepared  to  sanction  the 
measure  which  we  now  propose,  and  to  unite  in  one 

*  New  Haven  Christian  Spectator,  1832,  p.  145. 


THE   HOME   MISSIONARY   QUESTION.  ,   313 

concentrated  and  intense  effort,  to  build  up  the  wastes 
of  our  common  country,  and  supply  all  her  destitute 
with  the  means  of  salvation/^ 

Probably,  few  of  those  to  whom  this  circular  came, 
understood,  that  it  was  the  announcement  of  exter- 
minating war,  against  any  domestic  missionary  institu- 
tion, which  should  refuse  to  become  subordinate  to  this 
Society.     Such,  however,  it  proved  to  be. 

It  was  now  deemed  important  to  give  the  Board 
of  Missions  greater  efficiency  and  success,  in  the  work 
entrusted  to  it.  An  overture  was,  therefore,  brought 
into  the  Assembly  in  1828;  with  this  object.  It  was 
referred  to  a  committee,  which  reported,  that  the  over- 
ture presented  matter  of  the  first  importance,  to  the 
interests  of  the  Church  and  the  world ;  and  strongly 
recommended  it  to  the  Assembly.  While  the  subject 
was  under  discussion,  a  communication  was  received 
from  the  Executive  Committee  of  the  American  Home 
Missionary  Society,  announcing  the  appointment  of  a 
committee  of  that  body,  to  communicate  to  the  Assem- 
bly its  views  in  opposition  to  the  reorganization.  A 
warm  discussion  ensued ;  and  the  arts  of  strategy  were 
employed  to  defeat  the  measure ;  and  when  the  Assem- 
bly had  grown  weary  of  the  discussion,  a  member  of 
the  New  School  moved  the  previous  question.  This 
motion,  as  the  rule  then  stood,  involved  inevitable  mis- 
understanding and  confusion.  When  the  question  was 
propounded  from  the  chair,  ^^  Shall  the  main-  question 
be  now  put?" — if  answered  in  the  affirmative,  the 
debate  proceeded !  If,  in  the  negative,  the  debate  was 
arrested ;  but  the  whole  subject  was  indefinitely  post- 
poned !     In  the  present  instance,  the  decision  was  in 

27 


314  HISTORY   OF   THE    NEW   SCHOOL. 

the  negative,  many  members  being,  in  the  huny  of  the 
question,  unable  to  decide  its  effect. 

A  protest  was  drawn  up,  and  circulated  for  signature. 
The  Ne\y  School  became  alarmed.  A  committee  of 
conference  was  appointed,  of  five  members  from  each 
side  of  the  house. 

This  committee  reported  "  that  the  Board  of  Mis- 
sions already  have  the  power  to  establish  missions,  not 
only  among  the  destitute  in  our  own  country,  or  any 
other  country,  but  also  among  the  heathen,  in  any  part 
of  the  world;  to  select,  appoint,  and  commission  mis- 
sionaries, to  determine  their  salaries,  and  to  settle  and 
pay  their  accounts ; — that  they  have  full  authority  to 
correspond  with  any  other  body,  on  the  subject  of  mis- 
sions; to  appoint  an  Executive  Committee,  and  an 
efficient  agent  or  agents,  to  manage  their  missionary 
concerns ;  to  take  measures  to  form  auxiliary  societies, 
on  such  terms  as  they  may  deem  proper;  to  procure 
funds,  and,  in  general,  to  manage  the  missionary  con- 
cerns of  the  General  Assembly.  It  is,  therefore,  sub- 
mitted to  the  discretion  of  the  Board  of  Missions,  to 
consider  whether  it  is  expedient  for  them  to  carry  into* 
eifect  the  full  powers  which  they  possess." 

This  was  a  recognition  of  prerogatives,  never  before 
allowed  to  the  Board.  It  was  adopted  by  the  Assem- 
bly ;  and,  in  the  exercise  of  the  powers  thus  conceded, 
the  Board  soon  attained  to  a  greatly  increased  effi- 
ciency. 

Soon  after  the  reorganization,  the  Board  addressed 
letters  of  fraternal  salutation  to  the  American  Board, 
and  the  American  Home  Missionary  Society.  From 
the  former,  a  cordial  response  was  received.     In  the 


THE    HOME   MISSTONAEY   QUESTION.  315 

communication  to  the  latter,  the  Board  had  expressed 
the  hope  "  that  we  shall  be  mutually  helpers  of  each 
other's  joy,  and  joint-laborers  together  with  God,  in  his 
spiritual  husbandry.  We  shall,  together,  sow  the  seed 
of  the  everlasting,  ever-living,  Word ;  and,  together, 
rear  and  prune  the  trees  of  righteousness,  which  are  to 
be  translated  from  our  care,  in  the  nursery  here,  below, 
to  the  paradise  of  God.  Let  there  be  no  strife  between 
us,  we  pray  you ;  none  between  your  and  our  husband- 
men ;  unless  it  be  in  the  Christian  effort  of  spreading 
the  Gospel ;  and  in  diligence,  meekness,  humility,  and 
zeal  according  to  knowledge,  in  the  Master's  service. 
We  wish  you  all  success,  in  the  Lord's  field,  and  abun- 
dant harvest." 

In  reply,  the  Home  Missionary  Society  entered  into 
an  elaborate  argument,  to  show  the  impossibility  of  the 
two  societies  continuing  independent  and  harmonious. 
^'  One  such  general  Board,"  they  state,  ^'  in  the  opinion 
of  the  founders  of  the  Home  Missionary  Society,  was 
necessary,  to  prevent  the  interference  and  cross-action 
of  a  large  number  of  local  societies,  occupying  portions 
of  the  same  field,  without  concert  and  without  agree- 
ment. .  .  .  Let  each  of  the  missionarv  societies,  con- 
nected  with  the  denominations  named  in  the  former 
part  of  this  letter," — the  Presbyterian,  Congregational, 
Reformed  Dutch,  and  Associate  Reformed, — "  become 
auxiliaries,  or  branches,  of  the  Home  Missionary  So- 
ciety, on  the  terms  recommended  in  the  apjDcndix  to 
our  last  report ;  and  we  have  the  fullest  confidence 
that  they  would  all  be  greatly  strengthened  and  stimu- 
lated, in  their  work ;  while  we  can  conceive  of  no  em- 
barrassment, which  could  grow  out  of  such  a  connection. 


316  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

But  the  existence  of  two  general  Boards,  acting  inde- 
j)endently  of  each  other,  seeking  to  extend  their  elBForts 
over  the  whole,  or  any  large  part,  of  this  country,  and 
asking  the  co-operation  of  all  the  churches  within  cer- 
tain bounds,  must,  we  think,  increase,  rather  than 
diminish  the  evils  which  rendered  one  such  society 
necessary."* 

To  this  extraordinary  communication,  the  Board  of 
Missions,  wishing,  if  possible,  to  avoid  controversy, 
made  no  reply. 

In  December  of  the  same  year,  Dr.  Peters  visited 
Philadelphia,  to  solicit  funds  for  the  society.  During 
his  stay,  he  had  repeated  Interviews  with  Dr.  Ely,  the 
Secretary  of  the  Board,  and  author  of  its  letter  to  the 
Home  Society.  In  these  conferences,  the  New  York 
Secretary  succeeded  In  completely  winning  Dr.  Ely  over 
to  his  views.  The  Doctor  seems  to  have  been  daz- 
zled with  the  magnificent  conception  of  a  great  national 
Church,  to  embrace,  at  least,  the  four  denominations 
enumerated  In  the  Society's  reply, — an  idea  which  was 
ardently  cherished  by  some  of  the  leaders;  which  Is  the 
key  to  much  of  this  history;  and,  to  the  consummation 
of  which  nothing  was  necessary,  but  the  triumph  of 
^'  liberal'^  views  in  theology,  and  the  policy  of  Ameri- 
can societies,  instead  of  denominational  Boards.  From 
this  date.  Dr.  Ely  was  the  devoted  ally  of  those  socie- 
ties and  that  policy,  to  the  entire  disregard  of  those  doc- 
trinal questions  to  which  he  had,  before,  attached  so 
much  importance. 

Between  the  Secretaries,  a  plan  was  devised,  for  the 
amalgamation  of  the  Board  with  the  Society.     It  con- 
*  The  letter  in  the  Christian  Advocate,  vol.  vi.,  p.  473. 


THE   HOME   MISSIONARY   QUESTION.  317 

sisted  in  the  dissolution  of  the  Board,  and  the  inserting 
of  an  article,  in  the  Constitution  of  the  Society,  provid- 
ing that  "  The  officers  of  the  society  shall  be  a  Presi- 
dent, Vice-Presidents,  a  Treasurer,  an  Auditor,  a  Cor- 
responding Secretary,  and  a  Recording  Secretary,  who 
shall  be  annually  appointed  by  the  society ;  and  fifty 
Directors,  to  be  appointed,  annually,  by  the  General 
Conference  of  Maine,  the  General  Association  of  Xew 
Hampshire,  the  General  Convention  of  Vermont,  the 
General  Association  of  Massachusetts,  the  General  As- 
sociation of  Connecticut,  the  Evangelical  Consociation 
of  Rhode  Island,  the  General  Synod  of  the  Reformed 
Dutch  Church,  the  German  Reformed  Synod,  and  the 
General  Assembly  of  the  Presbyterian  Church  in  the 
United  States  of  America,  in  proportion  to  the  number 
of  ministers,  severally,  embraced  in  the  above-named 
ecclesiastical  bodies ;  which  said  Directors  shall  enter 
on  their  duties,  at  the  close  of  the  anniversary  next 
succeeding  their  appointment ;  and  the  said  officers  and 
Directors,  together  with  the  Directors  for  life,  shall  con- 
stitute a  Board,  seven  of  whom  shall  be  a  quorum,  at 
any  meeting,  regularly  convened.  And  it  shall  be  un- 
derstood, that,  should  any  of  the  above-named  ecclesi- 
astical bodies  neglect  or  refuse  to  appoint  their  propor- 
tion of  the  said  fifty  Directors,  it  shall  be  the  duty  of 
the  society,  at  its  next  annual  meeting,  after  such  defi- 
ciencies shall  have  occurred,  to  fill  the  vacancies  occa- 
sioned by  such  neglect." 

The  third  annual  report  of  the  Society,  made  in  May, 
1829, — the  earliest  date  at  which  the  plan,  if  adopted, 
could  have  gone  into  effiict, — enumerates  the  names  of 
one  hundred  and  thirty-five  life  Directors.     In  the  sixth 

27  « 


318  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

report,  they  had  increased,  by  one  hundred  dollar  con- 
tributions, to  one  hundred  and  ninety-iive.  Should  any 
one  of  the  denominations  neglect  or  refuse  to  elect  its 
proportion  of  Directors,  the  right  lapsed,  not,  to  the 
other  denominations,  but  to  the  society. 

Thus,  the  plan  would  have  placed,  not  the  Presbyte- 
rian Church,  alone,  but  all  the  designated  churches, 
together,  in  a  helj^less  minority,  at  the  start ;  under  cir- 
cumstances which  would  render  that  minority,  in  a  very 
few  years,  utterly  insignificant,  amidst  the  mass  of  the 
society,  and  its  hundreds  of  money-titled  Directors. 
Five  thousand  dollars  would  have  purchased  as  many 
life  Directors  as  were  offered  to  all  the  enumerated 
churches  together. 

On  such  terms,  the  Presbyterian  Church  was  ex- 
pected to  surrender  the  care  of  its  feeble  churches  and 
destitute  regions  to  the  unrestricted  control  of  this 
society  and  its  secretary. 

The  only  additional  feature,  in  the  plan,  required  the 
society  to  send  a  copy  of  its  annual  report  to  each  of 
the  ecclesiastical  bodies  named.  This  plan  was  unani- 
mously adopted,  by  the  Executive  Committee  in  New 
York.  The  Secretary  then,  revisited  Philadelphia,  and 
requested  an  interview  with  the  Board  of  Missions.  A 
meeting  was  immediately  called  ;  the  plan  laid  before  it, 
and  the  Secretary  admitted  to  a  full  and  patient  hearing. 
The  Board  then  adjourned  for  four  days.  On  reassemb- 
ling, it  was  resolved  that  the  Board  had  no  power  to 
entertain  such  a  proposition ;  and  that,  were  it  other- 
wise, it  was  its  deep  conviction,  ^'  that  the  interests  of 
the  Presbyterian  Church,  and  the  sacred  cause  of  mis- 
sions,  require,   that  the   character   and  powers    of  the 


THE   HOME   MISSIONARY   QUESTION.  319 

Board  should  remain  as  they  are ;  without  any  such 
modification  as  that  which  has  been  proposed." 

This  conclusion  was  immediately  communicated  to 
the  Society  in  New  York,  and  it  was  hoped  that  the 
subject  would  be  allowed  to  rest,  and  the  Board  of  Mis- 
sions permitted  quietly  to  fulfill  the  office  to  which  it 
was  erected.  The  Home  Missionary  Society,  however, 
at  once,  issued  a  private  circular,  dated  February  5, 
1829,  addressed  to  its  officers  and  members,  stating  their 
determination  to  persevere  in  the  hope  of  accomplishing 
the  amalgamation,  on  the  plan  j)roposed.  They  de- 
clared their  conviction  that  it  was  impossible  for  the 
two  institutions  to  exist  separately,  without  strife ;  and 
stated  the  intention  of  the  Society  in  New  York  to  place 
itself  in  an  "  attitude  to  invite  the  co-operation  of  the 
General  Assembly,  in  effecting  the  proposed  union.'^ 

Here  was  a  voluntary  association  of  gentlemen,  which 
had  not  yet  been  in  existence  three  years,  and  which  had 
no  more  right  to  claim  authority  over  the  missions  of 
the  Presbyterian  Church  than  had  the  United  States 
Bank.  Yet  it,  formally  and  persistently,  assumes  such 
a  right ;  claims,  in  the  Assembly,  itself,  a  voice  against 
that  body  giving  efficiency  to  its  own  Board  ;  and,  now, 
openly  demands  its  dissolution,  and  the  surrender,  by 
the  Presbyterian  Church,  to  the  discretion  of  that  so- 
cietv,  of  its  dearest  and  most  sacred  interests  and  most 
responsible  functions, — the  care  and  nurture  of  its  feeble 
churches,  and  the  supply  of  the  destitute  regions  with 
the  gospel  of  salvation, — interests  over  which  the  Church 
had,  for  a  century  and  a  quarter,  maintained,  constantly 
and  intimately,  an  unquestioned  and  unquestionable 
control. 


320  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

Upon  learning  the  contents  of  the  Circular  of  the 
American  Society,  the  Board  of  Missions  published  a 
rejoinder ;  setting  forth  the  facts,  and  making  its  appeal 
to  the  candor  and  conscience  of  the  Church. 

The  publication  of  the  Society's  plan  and  purpose 
was  undesigned  by  it.  The  Circular  had  been  intended 
for  private  distribution ;  and  complaint  was  made,  of 
a  breach  of  confidence,  by  some  one,  in  its  being  made 
known  to  the  Board  and  to  the  public.  Its  publica^tion 
was  its  defeat.  The  scheme  w^as  so  utterly  indefensi- 
ble, that  no  mention  of  it  seems  to  have  been  made  to 
the  Assembly,  which  met  in  May,  1829 ;  although  Dr. 
Peters  had  been  at  some  pains,  writing  to  a  number  of 
individuals,  urging  them  to  see  to  it  that  "  men  of  en- 
larged views  on  the  subject  of  missions  were  sent  to 
the  Assembly.''  That  body,  however,  adopted  a  res- 
olution, aifectionately  soliciting  the  co-operation  of 
the  churches  with  the  Board  of  Missions ;  yet  leaving 
them  entirely  free  to  their  own  unbiased  choice,  as 
to  the  channel  through  which  their  charities  should 
flow\ 

The  friends  of  the  Board  began  to  congratulate  them- 
selves, that  the  struggle  was  at  an  end,  and  they  would 
be  at  liberty  to  pursue  their  work  in  peace.  Their 
satisfaction  was  premature.  It  had,  now,  become  the 
fixed  policy  of  the  Home  Society  and  of  its  Secretary, 
Dr.  Peters,  to  destroy  the  Board,  as  the  only  way  by 
which  to  secure  to  itself  that  undivided  possession  of 
the  field,  with  a  view  to  which,  avowedly,  the  society 
was  organized.  There  was,  sometimes,  an.  affectation 
of  denying  this  purpose.  But,  not  only  Avas  that 
policy  manifest,  in  their  whole  course  of  action,  but 


THE   HOME  , MISSIONARY    QUESTION.  321 

the  purpose  was,  by  Dr.  Peters,  distinctly  avowed; 
as  we  shall  see  before  the  end  of  this  diapter.  New 
plans  were,  therefore,  devised,  and  a  new  campaign 
began. 

In  the  mean  time,  the  Board  was  pursuing,  with  un- 
wonted success,  the  objects  of  its  commission.  In  the 
first  year  after  the  reorganization,  it  accomplished  twice 
as  much  as  had  been  done  in  any  year  before.  The 
next  year,  its  income,  number  of  missionaries,  and 
amount  of  labor  performed,  were  doubled ;  and  the 
number  of  auxiliaries  trebled.  In  1828,  its  income 
was  $2996;  in  1829,  $7665;  in  1830,  $14,440;  in 
1831,  $19,773.  In  that  year,  the  active  hostilities  were 
intensified,  and  in  1832,  the  increase  was  small.  The 
receipts  were  $20,692. 

The  new  plan  of  the  American  Society,  contemplated 
a^transfer  of  the  question  to  the  AYest.  In  1829,  the 
Rev.  Dr.  J.  J.  Janeway,  walking  in  Nassau  street,  New 
York,  was  accosted  by  a  ministerial  brother,  who  re- 
quested an  interview.  "  AVe  met,"  says  Dr.  Janeway, 
"  at  the  time  and  place  agreed  upon.  ^  I  wish,'  said  the 
brother  to  me,  '  to  apprise  you  of  the  design  of  the 
Executive  Committee  of  the  Home  Hissionary  Society. 
They  have  determined  to  destroy,  if  they  can,  the  As- 
sembly's Board  of  Missions ;  and  to  accomplish  this 
design,  Mr.  Peters  will  go  to  the  West  and  South,  in 
the  close  of  the  summer,  or  early  in  the  fall.  Do  not 
inquire  how  I  got  the  information.  I  knoNv^  the  fact. 
Let  this  suffice ;  and  avail  yourself  of  this  information, 
to  counteract  their  design.  My  name  is  not  to  be  men- 
tioned.'" The  Board  accepted  the  warning,  and  its 
Corresponding  Secretary  visited  the  West,  in  the  fall, 


322  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

and  there  found  Dr.  Peters.     Subsequent  developments, 
sufficiently  con-firmed  the  nature  of  his  errand.* 

At  a  meeting  of  the  Executive  Committee  of  the 
Home  Society,  held  in  New  York,  on  the  11th  of 
January,  foUowiiigj  a  "  Central  Committee  of  agency, 
for  home  missions  in  the  Western  States'^  was  appointed 
at  Cincinnati,'  Ohio;  to  co-operate  with  the  Society,  in 
the  work  of  missions,  in  the  field  assigned  it.  On  the 
22d  of  February,  the  Central  Committee  was  directed 
by  the  Executive  Committee,  in  New  York,  to  suspend 
the  commencement  of  its  operations,  for  tlie  purpose  of 
waiting  the  result  of  overtures,  about  to  be  made  to  the 
Board  of  Missions  and  the  General  Assembly.  The 
Committee  stated  the  following  as  their  intentions : 

''  1.  They  will  request  the  General  Assembly  to 
concur  with  this  Committee  in  the  appointment  of  the 
above  Committee  of  Agency,  with  such  alterations  in 
the  same,  as  shall  be  mutually  agreed  on  by  this  Com- 
mittee and  the  said  General  Assembly. 

"2.  They  will  request  the  General  Assembly  to 
instruct  its  Board  of  Missions  to  transact  its  business, 
within  such  limits  as  shall  be  agreed  on,  through  the 
said  Committee  of  Agency,  and  to  co-operate  with  the 
same,  in  such  manner  as  shall  then  be  prescribed. "f 

In  pursuance  of  this  plan,  the  Executive  Committee 
of  the  Society  appointed  three  of  their  number,  to 
present  to  the  General  Assembly,  the  requests  and  pro- 
positions which  it  contains.  The  Presbytery  of  Cincin- 
nati, was  induced  to  overture  the  Assembly  in  favor  of 
the  plan   of  operations    proposed,   and  to  request  the 

^  Dr.  Janeway,  in  the  Presbyterian,  1836,  p.  197. 
f  Home  Missionary,  1830,  p.  55.  ~ 


THE   HOME   MISSIONARY   QUESTION.  323 

Committee  in  New  York  to  appoint  a  delegation,  to 
further  the  object,  in  the  Assembly.  These  three  clefe- 
gates  were,  therefore,  modestly  announced  to  the  Assem- 
bly, as  i^resent  "at  the  request  of  the  Presbytery.'^ 
They  united  witli  the  commissioners  of  the  Presbytery, 
in  laying  the  proposition  before  the  Committee  of  Bills 
and  Overtures.  That  committee  reported  it  to  the  Assem- 
bly, with  a  recommendation  that  the  delegates  from  the 
American  Society  be  heard,  in  explanation  of  the  plan. 
This  recommendation,  the  Assembly  does  not  seem  to 
have  adopted.  After  some  discussion  of  the  general 
subject  of  this  overture,  a  special  committee  of  five  was 
appointed,  embracing  the  two  Cincinnati  commissioners, 
to  confer  Avith  the  delegates  of  the  American  Society, 
and  report  to  the  Assembly.  The  committee  reported, 
"  that  it  was  expedient  for  the  Board  of  Missions  of  the 
General  Assembly,  and  the  Board  of  the  Home  Mis- 
sionary Society  to  conduct  their  missionary  operations, 
in  the  West,  through  a  common  Board  of  agency,  in  that 
part  of  the  country." 

This  report  was  accepted,  the  committee  was  dis- 
charged, and  the  whole  subject  dismissed. 

On  another  point,  connected  with  the  Board  of  Mis- 
sions, this  Assembly  took  action,  exceedingly  obnoxious 
to  the  New  School  party.  The  Board  had  declined 
applications  from  the  Presbyteries  of  Union  and  French 
Broad,  for  commissions,  on  behalf  of  two  young  men 
from  the  Mary vi lie  Seminary ;  because, — so  states  Dr. 
Ely,* — "  they  held  that  God  is  the  efficient  cause  of 
sin.''  The  Presbyteries,  thereupon,  memorialized  the 
Assembly ;  which  replied   "  That  though  they  do  not 

*  Philadelphia,  1831,  p.  102. 


324  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

recognize^  in  the  Board  of  Missions,  the  authority  to 
sk  in  judgment  upon  the  orthodoxy  or  morality  of  any 
minister  wlio  is  in  good  standing  in  his  own  Presby- 
tery ;  yet  from  the  necessity  of  the  case,  they  must 
exercise  their  own  sound  discretion,  upon  the  expedi- 
ency, or  inexpediency,  of  appointing,  or  withholding 
an  appointment,  from  any  applicant;  holding  them- 
selves amenable  to  the  General  Assembly  for  all  their 
official  acts." 

The  action  of  the  Assembly,  on  the  project  of  joint 
operations  in  the  West,  was  sufficiently  decisive,  to  have 
been  accepted,  as  final.  But  in  the  July  number  of 
the  "  Home  Missionary,"  the  monthly  organ  of  the 
Society,  the  whole  scheme  was  published,  and  the  hope 
expressed,  "that  when  our  brethren  of  the  Board  of 
Missions  shall  have  examined  the  plan  proposed,  they 
will  see  it  to  be  entirely  practicable;  and  will  unite 
with  us,  and  all  other  friSds  of  the  common  cause,  in 
wishing  its  adoption,  with  such  changes  and  modifica- 
tions as  may  be  rendered  mutually  acceptable."*  In 
that  same  month.  Dr.  Peters  met  with  the  Cincinnati 
Presbytery,  for  the  purpose  of  conference  with  it,  "  as 
to  measures  proper  to  be  pursued  to  promote  union  of 
action,  in  the  Western  States  between  the  American 
Home  Missionary  Society,  and  the  Board  of  Missions."t 
In  a  discussion,  running  through  parts  of  two  days,  he 
animadverted  upon  the  course  of  the  Assembly  and  the 
Board,  in  rejecting  the  plan  for  joint  agency ;  declared 
his  purpose  to  devote  his  whole  future  life,  if  necessary, 

*  Home  Missionary,  1830,  p.  57. 

t  Dr.  Peters'  Letter  in  reply  to  Dr.  Green,  of  Nov.  15,  1831,  Be- 
man's  Appeal,  p.  59. 


THE    HOME    MISSIOXAPvY   QUESTION.  325 

to  accomplish  the  amalgamation  of  the  Board  with  the 
Society ;  and  urged  the  appointment  of  a  committee  by 
the  Presbytery,  to  press  the  matter  anew  on  the  atten- 
tion of  the  Board.  The  Presbytery  adopted  his  sugges- 
tions, and  appointed  a  committee,  by  which  a  letter  was 
addressed  to  the  Board.  In  it,  the  evils  of  division 
were  insisted  upon,  and  the  Board  was  urged  to  adopt 
the  plan,  which  had  already  been  so  decisively  rejected 
by  the  Assembly.  The  letter,  also,  informed  the 
Board  that  the  Central  Committee  of  Ao:encv  had  been 
dissolved,  and  all  action  in  the  cause  of  missions 
arrested,  to  await  the  attempt  at  union. 

To  this  communication,  the  Board,  through  its  Secre- 
tary, the  Rev.  Joshua  T.  Russell,  made  a  full  reply ; 
giving  the  history  of  the  whole  matter,  and  stating  the 
reasons  why,  even  aside  from  the  decisive  action  of  the 
Assembly,  the  measure  was  inexpedient  and  imprac- 
ticable ;  and  closing  with  the  assurance  that  "  the  Board 
do  most  sincerely  believe,,  that,  if  the  churches  in  the 
West  are  left  to  make  their  own  election  of  the  particu- 
lar channel  through  wlilch  their  charities  shall  flow,  to 
bless  the  perishing,  and  the  Presbyteries,  to  adopt  and 
pursue  such  plans  as  they  may,  severally,  deem  most 
expedient,  to  promote  the  cause  of  missions, — existing 
evils  will  soon  be  removed,  and  harmony  and  peace 
will  pervade  every  section  of  the  Church,  in  reference 
to  future  missionary  operations." 

This  letter,  at  the  request  of  a  member  of  the  com- 
mittee to  which  it  was  addressed,  was  published  in  the 
Cincinnati  Journal.  It  produced  a  deep  and  salutary 
impression,  in  favor  of  the  Board;  relieving  misappre- 
hensions,  developing    the    facts,   and    awakening    the 

28 


326  HISTORY  OF  THE  NEW  SCHOOL. 

attention  of  the  Church,  to  the  true  character  and  ends 
of  the  policy  so  pertinaciously  followed  by  the  Ameri- 
can Society.  Could  the  Board  of  Missions  be  excluded 
from  the  Western  field,  its  speedy  extinction  would  be 
inevitable.  The  strategy  of  the  Society  was  admirable. 
But  what  shall  be  said  for  its  morality  ? 


CHAPTER    XXI. 

THE   SYSTEM   OF   CONGREGATIONALIZING  AGENCIES. 

All  our  troubles  came  from  Congregationalism — American  Educa- 
tion Society — Presbyterian  Education  Society — It  becomes  the 
Presbyterian  Branch — It  resumes  the  original  name — Its  real 
character — Influence  of  the  American  Society — New  England 
men  poured  into  our  Church — Latitudinarians — American  Home 
Missionary  Society — Young  men  sent  abroad  for  licensure  and 
ordination — Centres  of  influence  acquired — Lane  Seminary — The 
Plan  of  Union — Moderation — A  towering  national  Church  aimed 
at — Confession  of  Faith  to  be  altered — These  agencies,  beyond  the 
control  of  the  Church — Her  divine  vitality  evinced  by  her  triumph 
over  their  combined  power. 

It  will  have  been  observed,  tliat  all  the  difficulties 
and  distractions,  developed  in  these  pages,  resulted 
directly  from  the  admission  into  our  Church  of  a 
foreign, — a  Congregational  element.  It  remained  un- 
assimilated;  and  engaged  in  the  most  strenuous,  varied, 
and  persistent  exertions,  to  accomplish  the  transforma- 
tion of  the  Church,  in  doctrine  and  order,  and  to 
deprive  her  of  her  evangelic  office. 

The  organization  of  instrumentalities  to  accomplish 
these  objects  was,  now,  most  comprehensive,  and  com- 
plete ;  the  energies  devoted  to  them  were  untiring ;  and 
the  resources  at  command  abundant. 

At  the  foundation,  was  the  American  Education 
Society.     This  society,  organized  in  Boston,  in  1815, 

327 


328  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

and  reorganized  in  1826;  was  constructed  with  admir- 
able skill,  with  a  view  to  acquiring  complete  control 
over  ministerial  education,  throughout  the  country.  Its 
structure,  as  reorganized,  was  that  of  a  close  corpora- 
tion. Contributors  of  one  hundred  dollars,  if  lavmen, 
and  forty  dollars,  if  ministers,  became  thereby  honorary 
members.  But  the  right  to  vote  was,  after  the  reor- 
ganization, restricted  to  those  already  members,  and  to 
such  others  as,  from  time  to  time,  were  chosen  by  them. 
In  the  annual  report  of  this  Society,  for  1831,  it  an- 
nounced 604  young  men  aided,  in  ninety  institutions  of 
learning;  411  in  New  England,  and  193,  elsewhere.  Its 
receipts  were  ^40,450.34;  its  expenditures  $49,892.80, 
and  its  permanent  fund  $53,933.27.  Four  hundred 
ministers  of  the  gospel  had  already  been  sent  forth  from 
among  its  beneficiaries;  and  ^^ one-sixth,  if  not  one- 
fifth,  of  all  the  students  connected  with  theological 
seminaries,  in  the  United  States,"  were  claimed  as  under 
its  care. 

One  conspicuous  feature  in  its  system  of  organization 
was,  its  Branch  Societies  and  Boards  of  Agency.  Of 
these,  it  had  nine,  distributed  from  Maine  to  Indiana 
and  Illinois.  The  largest  and  most  important  of  them, 
was  the  Presbyterian  Branch.  We  have  already  seen 
the  origin  and  attitude  of  the  Presbyterian  Education 
Society,  organized  in  New  Brunswick,  and  located  in 
New  York,  \yhen  the  Board  of  Education  was  formed, 
in  1819,  this  Society  inserted  the  following  article  in  its 
constitution. 

"  This  Society  shall  be  auxiliary  to  the  Education 
Board  established  by  the  General  Assembly;  and  shall 
annually  report  to  them  their  proceedings ;  reserving  to 


THE   COXGEEGATIONALIZING   SYSTEM.  329 

themselves,  however,  the  full  and  unrestricted  right  of 
taking  up  any  young  man  Avho  may  give  satisfactory 
evidence  of  piety  and  talents.'' 

This  nominal  relation  continued,  until  the  year  1826  ; 
when  a  proposition  was  made  by  the  Board  of  Managers, 
to  the  Directors  of  the  American  Education  Society, 
for  union.  '^  The  Presbyterian  Education  Society 
agreeing  with  the  American,  in  the  great  principles 
which  form  the  basis  of  its  operations,  was  accordingly 
united  with  it,  under  the  name  of  the  Presbyterian  Branch 
of  the  American  Education  Society.  This  arrangement 
took  place  in  May,  1827.  From  this  lime,  till  May, 
1831,  the  Branch,  by  mutual  agreement,  confined  its 
efforts  within  the  States  of  New  York,  New  Jersey, 
and  Pennsylvania;  except  as  assistance  was  occasionally 
rendered  to  the  parent  society,  in  sustaining  the  common 
cause.''*  The  system  announced  by  the  Presbyterian 
Branch  was  this  : — 

"  1st.  In  the  selection  of  objects  of  patronage,  the 
mere  distinction  of  sect  is  to  be  wholly  disregarded ; 
but  no  young  man  is  to  be  taken  under  the  care  of  the 
Society,  or  can  receive  aid  from  its  funds,  until  he  has 
given  satisfactory  evidence,  to  an  Examining  Committee 
of  three  persons,  one  of  wdiom  is  always  appointed  by 
the  Directors  of  the  American  Society,  of  his  piety,  his 
talents,  his  indigence,  and  his  determination  to  devote 
himself  to  the  work  of  the  gospel  ministry ; — which 
determination  must  be  ex^iressed  in  writing,  and  re- 
peated quarterly. 

"  2d.  All  moneys,  furnished  from  its  funds,  to  young 

*  Address  of  the  Presbyterian  Education  Society  to  the  Christian 
Public.     New  York,  1831. 
28* 


330  HISTORY   OF   THE    NEW   SCHOOL. 

men  under  the  care  of  the  Society,  are  advanced  as  a 
loan,  not  a  gift, — and  for  the  repayment,  without  in- 
terest, (and  as  soon  as  God  shall  enable  him,)  of  all  the 
money  so  received  by  him,  each  young  man  shall  give 
his  bond. 

"  3d.  All  accounts  must  be  kept  in  the  name  of  the 
American  Education  Society,  and  transmitted,  quarterly, 
to  the  Secretary  of  the  Presbyterian  Branch,,  to  be  by 
him  transmitted  to  the  Secretary  of  the  American 
Society,  in  time  to  be  laid  before  the  Directors,  at  their 
quarterly  meetings.  ' 

"  4th.  Over  all  young  men,  aided  from  the  funds  of 
the  Education  Society,  the  Secretary  of  the  American 
Education  Society,  the  Rev.  E.  Cornelius,  late  of  Salem, 
Massachusetts,  is  to  exercise  a  constant  paternal  super- 
vision ;  and  part  of  his  duty,  it  will  be,  to  visit,  and 
personally  converse  with  each  of  them,  at  least,  once 
a  year.'^* 

In  a  word,  the  Presbyterian  Branch  was  a  mere  in- 
strument, of  the  American  Society,  in  the  field  assigned 
to  it.  The  Presbyterian  Church,  at  large,  outside  the 
three  enuumerated  States,  was  left  under  the  immediate 
supervision  of  the  Society.  The  experiment  thus  made, 
however,  soon  demonstrated  that  the  Society,  under  its 
own  name,  could  accomplish  but  little,  within  the  bounds 
of  the  Presbyterian  Church.  The  subject  became,  there- 
fore, matter  of  consideration,  in  the  Board  of  Directors, 
and  it  was  concluded,  by  them,  ^^  that  the  interests  of 
the  Society  would  be  promoted,  by  a  reorganization  of 
the  Presbyterian  Branch,  so  as  to  extend  its  operations, 
within  the  territorial  limits  of  the  Presbyterian  Church.'^ 
*  Eeport  of  the  Presbyterian  Education  Society,  1827,  p.  10. 


THE   CONGREGATIONALIZING   SYSTEM.  331 

It  was,  therefore,  agreed  by  the  parent  Board,  that  here- 
after, the  administration  of  the  affairs  of  the  American 
Education  Society,  within  the  territorial  limits  of  the 
Presbyterian  Church,  out  of  New  England,  be  committed 
to  the  Presbyterian  Branch  ;  if  agreeable  to  said  Branch." 
The  fundamental  conditions  of  this  union  were  that  "  the 
principles  and  rules  of  the  American  Education  Society, 
as  existing  at  the  time  of  this  arrangement,  or,  as  they 
may  be  hereafter  determined,  with  the  concurrence  of 
the  Presbyterian  Society,  be  received  and  observed,  in 
all  cases,  where  they  are  capable  of  being  applied ;" — 
and  "  The  Secretary  of  the  parent  society  to  have  the 
liberty  of  residing  in  New  York,  and  superintending 
the  affairs  of  the  Presbyterian  Society;  if,  in  his  judg- 
ment, he  can  better  promote,  by  such  an  arrangement, 
the  general  interests  confided  to  him  ; — in  which  case, 
his  support  to  be  provided  for,  by  the  two  societies,  in 
such  manner  and  proportion  as  may  be  agreed  upon,  by 
their  respective  Boards,  or  Committees.^' "^ 

The  plan  was  adopted,  in  May,  1831 ;  and,  thereupon, 
the  Presbyterian  Education  Society  issued  a  circular, 
setting  forth  the  objects  and  principles  of  the  new 
arrangement.  "As  the  American  Education  Society 
was  located  in  the  heart  of  the  Congregational  churches 
of  'New  England,  and  the  Presbyterian  Branch  had 
an  annual  surplus  income,  to  be  appropriated  in  the 
destitute  parts  of  the  country,  it  was  judged  best  that 
the  Branch  should  enlarge  its  sphere  of  operations,  to 
its  former  dimensions,  and  appropriate  its  own  fund? ; 
especially,  as  those  most  needing  them  were  in  the  limits 
of  the  Presbyterian  Church.  This,  beside  being  the 
*  Annual  Report  of  American  Education  Society,  1831,  p.  50. 


332  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

most  natural  method,  would  be  less  likely  to  excite 
jealousies  of  denominatioual  influence."  "By  virtue 
of  this  new  arrangement,  the  Branch  resumes  the  former 
name  of  Presbyterian  Education  Society,  and  occupies 
its  former  limits.  It  takes,  as  its  own,  the  rules  of  the 
American  Society,  and  assumes  its  engagements,  within 
prescribed  limits.  The  entire  concerns  of  that  Society, 
out  of  New  England,  are  now  committed  to  this,  as  a 
co-ordinate  institution ;  under  no  other  restriction,  in 
the  administration,  than  that  of  conforming  to  received 
rules,  and  reporting  proceedings,  regularly."* 

"  The  name  of  the  Society,  it  will  be  perceived,  is 
Presbyterian.  It  is  so,  in  fact.  It  has  been  nurtured 
in  the  bosom  of  the  Presbyterian  Church ;  and  owes  its 
success  to  the  liberality  of  its  members.  But,  though 
Presbyterian,  .it  is  not  a  sectarian  institution. "f 

Such  was  the  sole  ground  upon  which  this  institution 
claimed  to  be  Presbyterian.  It  had  the  name,  and  the 
money,  of  Presbyterians.  But  it  was  neither  responsi- 
ble to  the  Presbyterian  Church,  nor  sought  her  welfare, 
nor  trained  the  youth  committed  to  its  charge  in  her 
faith.  It  was  a  ^^  catholic  society,"  and  her  catholic 
spirit  is  the  glory  of  the  Presbyterian  Church !  And 
all  this  was  written  and  published  over  the  signature 
of  '^  E.  Cornelius,  Cor.  Sec'y.^^  Di'.  Cornelius,  the  Cor- 
responding Secretary  of  the  Boston  Society,  had  been 
invited  to  fill  the  same  office,  for  the  Presbyterian  So- 
ciety ;  and  had  accordingly  removed  to  New  York, 
and,  without  going  through  the  form  of  joining  the 
Presbyterian  Church,  was  become  the  controlling  spirit, 

*  Address  of  Presbyterian  Education  Society,  1831,  p.  2. 
t  Ibid.,  p.  9. 


THE   CONGREGATIOXALIZIXG   SYSTEM.  333 

in  the  institution  -which,  thus,  assumed  charge  of  her 
most  vital  interests. 

When,  in  1828,  the  Rev.  William  T.  Hamilton,  ap- 
peared before  the  Synod  of  Pittsburgh,  as  agent  of  the 
Presbyterian  Branch  of  the  American  Education  So- 
ciety, a  few  pointed  questions,  propounded  by  Dr.  Jane- 
way,  compelled  the  agent  to  confess  to  the  Synod,  that 
the  title,  ^'  Presbyterian,"  was  a  '^  misnomer.''  Striking 
out  the  word  ^^  Branch"  from  the  iiame,  only  rendered 
it  more  utterly  untrue.  But  this  was  the  mode  by  which 
the  Boston  Society  transferred  the  seat  of  its  operations 
to  New  York,  and  made  the  Presbyterian  Church  its 
special  field. 

Already,  in  1829,  Professor  Stuart  of  Andover  had 
assured  the  public,  that,  to  his  "  certain  knowledge," 
the  Directors  of  that  society,  in  and  about  Boston,  were 
in  the  habit  of  recommending  ^^  all  young  men,  who  go 
■from  New  England  into  the  boundaries  of  the  General 
Assembly  of  the  Presbyterian  Church,  to  unite  with 
the  Presbyteries,  and  not  to  hold  on  upon  Congrega- 
tionalism ;" — and  that  ^'  nearly  one-half  of  the  young 
men  who  have  gone  from  the  Andover  Theological 
Seminary,  have  become  Presbyterians."'^  We  have 
already  seen  the  sort  of  theology  which  those  Andover 
youth  were  taught  by  Professor  Stuart ;  and,  in  the 
very  document  in  which  he  makes  the  above  statement, 
the  professor  indulged  in  a  style  of  remark  respecting 
the  General  Assembly,  very  illustrative  of  the  kind  of 
sentiments,  with  which  his  pupils  would  enter  It ;  alike 
hostile  and  contemptuous,  toward  its  doctrinas,  its  order, 
government,  and  institutions. 
*  Examination  of  Strictures  upon  the  A.  E.  S.,  by  M.  Stuart,  p.  30. 


334  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

Such  was  the  system,  devised  by  oui*  Congregational 
brethren,  for  training  a  ministry  for  the  Presbyterian 
Church.  Professedly,  indifferent  to  the  doctrinal  di- 
versities between  Andover,  New  Haven,  Princeton, 
Auburn,  and  Lane,  it  was  immaterial  whether  the  the- 
ology, which  the  candidates  imbibed,  and  the  system  of 
order  in  which  they  were  instructed,  were  in  harmony, 
or  at  variance  with  those  of  our  standards.  That,  on 
both  of  these  subjects,  they  should  generally  be  latidu- 
dinarian,  arose,  of  necessity,  from  the  circumstances  in 
which  they  were  placed,  and  the  avowed  indifference  of 
the  society  by  which  they  were  sustained.  The  Secre- 
tary, in  his  2^^ternal  visitations,  brought  annually  to 
bear  upon  them,  influences,  the  more  potential,  because 
not  too  frequent  to  degenerate  into  familiarity.  Every 
report  which  the  young  men  made, — every  dollar  which 
they  expended,  directed  their  thoughts  and  affections 
toward  New  England,  and  the  principles  governing  its 
various  "  catholic''  and  "  national"  institutions.  Thus, 
the  system  was  eminently  adapted  to  gain  control  over 
the  candidates,  within  the  bosom  of  the  Church,  itself, 
and  mould  their  principles  to  the  purposes  of  the  society 
and  its  patrons.  But  the  great  fountain  of  supplies  for 
our  ministry  was  New  England,  itself.  Her  youth, 
trained,  whether  by  Taylor,  or  Woods,  or  Tyler, — it 
was  immaterial  which  ; — and  held  in  pecuniary  bonds  to 
the  society,  as  all  its  beneficiaries  were,  for  the  amounts 
expended  in  their  education,  were  encouraged  to  enter 
the  Presbyterian  Church,  l)y  patrons,  who  could  scarcely 
speak  of  its  distinctive  principles  and  character,  without 
evincing  their  repugnance  and  scorn. 

To  usher  these  accessions   into  our  bosom,  and  find 


THE   COOS^GKEGATIONALIZING  SYSTEM.  335 

for  them  fields  of  labor  and  influence,  the  American 
Home  Missionary  Society  stood  ready,  and  prepared,  at 
all  points.  "  It  was  organized,^'  says  a  writer,  .already 
quoted,  "  on  the  presumption,  that,  j^rovided  the  land 
can  be  supplied  with  an  intelligent  and  faithful  gospel  , 
ministry,  it  is  a  matter  of  inferior  moment,  whether  the 
churches    be   called   Congregational,   Presbyterian,    or 

Dutch The  Board  never  asks  the  candidate  for 

missionary  work.  What  Seminary  has  instructed  you? 
What  shade  of  orthodoxy  do  you  profess  ?  What  party 
do  you  march  with  ?  What  shibboleth  do  you  pronounce? 
It  asks  him,  only,  for  his  credentials,  as  a  minister  of 
the  Gospel."* 

If  it  was  doubtful  whether  a  candidate  would  stand 
the  test  of  a  Presbyterial  examination,  he  was  ordained, 
before  being  sent  out;  perhaps,  by  a  Congregational 
council;  but,  more  frequently,  by  the  Presbytery  of 
Newburyport,  or  the  Third  Presbytery  of  New  York. 
Neither  of  these  bodies  was  in  any  danger  of  hesitancy, 
upon  the  score  of  doctrine  or  order.  The  former  of 
them,  at  one  time,  ordained  nine  young  men,  as  evan- 
gelists, for  the  American  Home  Missionary  Society. 
The  latter,  upon  another  occasion,  at  the  request  of  the 
same  society,  set  apart  ten.  Most  of  these  were  destined 
to  fields  in  the  Presbyterian  Church,  in  Ohio  and  the 
West;  where,  in  all  directions.  Presbyteries  were  or- 
ganized, competent  and  entitled  to  try  and  judge  the 
qualifications  of  those  who  felt  called  to  labor  among 
them.  But,  armed  with  "  clean  papers,"  these  youthful 
cadets  of  liberal  Christianity  claimed  and  received  ad- 
mission into  the  Western  Presbyteries,  and  whilst,  in 
*  Christian  Spectator,  1832,  p.  146. 


336  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

many  cases,  altogether  ignorant  of  the  Confession  and 
order  of  the  Church,  assumed  and  exercised  decisive 
control  over  all  its  dearest  interests. 

Coincident  with  these  operations  from  without,  was 
,  the  policy  pursued,  within  the  bosom  of  the  Church. 
"  If  a  candidate  for  the  ministry  was  rejected  by  an 
orthodox  Presbytery ,''  says  Dr.  Wilson,  "  for  unsound- 
ness in  the  faith,  he  was  immediately  sent  off  to  New 
England,  or  to  the  Western  Reserve,  or  to  some  other 
unsound  region,  and  there  invested  with  ministerial 
office,  and  sent  back  with  clean  papers ;  and  was  soon 
in  our  churches  and  judicatories.  At  the  last  meeting 
of  the  General  Assembly,  [that  of  1834,]  I  heard  a 
New  School  gentleman  boast,  that  he  had  brought  into 
the  Presbyterian  Church,  about  thirty-eight,  in  this 
way  ;  some  of  whom  were  then  members  of  the  Assem- 
bly. The  consumption  of  time,  and  the  great  trouble 
of  manufacturing  Presbyterian  ministers  in  this  Avay, 
was  made  a  subject  of  grievous  complaint;  and  was 
urged  as  a  reason  for  the  organization  of  "elective 
affinity  Presbyteries,"  that  they  might  proceed  more 
expeditiously  in  this  '^good  work  !"*  The  New  School 
gentleman  was,  the  Rev.  Mr.  Patterson  of  Philadelphia. 

With  the  facilities  which  were  at  their  command,  it 
would  have  been  strange,  if  the  managers  of  this  vast 
system  had  overlooked  the  advantage  of  securing  con- 
trol, at  such  places  as  promised  to  become  centres  of 
great  and  extensive  influence.  Cincinnati  was,  of  these, 
evidently,  the  first  in  importance.  Dr.  J.  L.  Wilson, 
the  father  of  the  ministry  there,  was  a   man  of  great 

*  "  One  proposition  sustained  against  the  New  School,"  by  Bev.  J. 
L.  Wilson,  D.  D.,  1835,  p.  10. 


THE   CONGREGATIONALIZING   SYSTEM.  337 

ability  and  influence,  and  of  a  warm  and  trusting 
spirit.  His  confidence  was  easily  gained,  on  behalf  of 
plans  which  purported  to  liave  nothing  in  view  but  the 
building  of  Christ's  kingdom.  The  Presbytery  of  Cin- 
cinnati was  speedily  filled  with  young  ministers  from 
the  East,  fully  imbued  with  the  new  theology,  and  eager 
to  signalize  their  zeal  by  enterprises  and  triumphs  on 
its  behalf.  The  venerable  Wilson  awoke  from  his  sleep ; 
but  it  w^as,  to  find  himself  betraved  and  bound. 

Lane  Seminary  had  been  founded  by  the  beneficence 
of  an  Old  School  minister,  the  Rev.  James  Kemper, 
who  gave  seventy  acres  of  land,  in  the  suburbs  of  Cin- 
cinnati, for  the  purpose  of  a  theological  seminary ;  pro- 
vided, the  professors  should  be  in  connection  with  the 
Presbyterian  Church,  nnder  the  care  of  the  General 
Assembly  of  the  Presbyterian  Church  in  the  United 
States  of  America.  Subsequently,  Mr.  Lane,  a  Baptist 
gentleman,  through  Dr.  Wilson,  gave  twenty  thousand 
dollars  to  the  institution ;  which  were  expended  in 
erecting  buildings.  Measures  were  taken  to  endow  the 
^professorships  of  the  Seminary.  Mr.  Arthur  Tappan, 
of  New  York,  President  of  the  Presbyterian  Education 
Society,  and  Auditor  of  the  American  Home  Missionary 
Society,  oifered  to  endow  the  chair  of  theology,  pro- 
vided he  were  allowed  to  nominate  Dr.  Beecher  to  the 
post.  The  proposition  was  accepted,  and  the  Dr.  was 
transferred  from  Boston,  and  the  perplexities  of  his 
position  as  the  confidential  adviser  and  apologist  of  Dr. 
Taylor,  to  preside  over  the  interests  of  Presbyterianism, 
at  the  great  centre  of  influence  for  the  West.  Soon,  his 
son,  the  Rev.  Edward  Beecher,  was  translated  from  the 
tutorship   in   Yale,   to   preside    over   Illinois    College. 

29 


338  HISTORY   OF    THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

"\Yliile  the  fountains  of  education  were  being  tlius  seized, 
a  new  impulse  was  given  to  the  tide  of  ministerial 
immigration,  from  ISTew  England  into  the  Church ;  and 
tlie  fict  began  to  be  openly  and  unequivocably  avowed, 
by  the  younger  and  more  imprudent  of  the  number, 
that  they  were  coming,  with  the  express  design  to  gain 
control  over,  and  revolutionize  it. 

In  the  system  organized,  under  the  auspices  of  the 
American  Societies,  the  form  of  adopting  the  Confes- 
sion of  Faith  was  usually  observed,  by  ministers,  or- 
dained within  the  Church ;  although  it  was  divested  of 
real  significance.  The  Plan  of  Union  threw  the  doors, 
yet  more  widely,  open ;  and  individual  ministers,  and 
entire  associations  were  received,  without  any  inquiry, 
as  to  doctrine,  or  allusion  to  the  Confession  of  Faith. 
Thus,  a  great  number  of  ministers  Avere  brought  into 
the  bosom  of  the  Church,  without  even  a  pretence  of 
attachment  to  it,  or  respect  for  its  doctrines  or  order. 
On  the  contrary,  the  majority  of  them  were  not  only 
Congregationalists,  in  their  views  of  order ;  and,  in  their 
faith,  held  to  one  or  other  of  the  multiform  phases  of  New 
England  theology;  but  were  under  bonds  to  the  Educa- 
tion Society,  for  the  debt  incurred  in  their  preparation 
for  the  ministry ;  and  dependent,  for  daily  bread,  upon 
the  treasury  of  the  Home  Missionary  Society,  by  which 
their  fields  of  labor  were  selected  and  their  subsistence 
provided. 

To  all  this,  is  to  be  added,  the  silent  but  enormous 
moral  power  exerted  by  the  American  Board  of  Com- 
missioners, by  virtue  of  the  mere  fact  that  it,  a  ISTew 
England  institution,  was  the  only  re^^resentative  of  the 
spirit  of   missions  in  our  Church, — the  only  channel 


THE   CONGREGATIONALIZIXG   SYSTEM.  339 

y 

through  which  our  people  could  express  their  love  to 

the  souls  of  the  heathen,  and  their  reverence  for  the 
Saviour's  last  command.  And,  to  crown  the  whole, 
the  spirit  of  Moderatism  was  occupying  almost  all  the 
high  places  of  the  Church,  which  were  not  possessed  by 
the  New  School ;  presiding  with  few  exceptions,  over 
all  our  colleges ;  filling  our  influential  pulpits ;  and 
occupying  the  chairs  of  instruction  in  our  seminaries, — 
ready,  always,  to  cry  "  Peace !"  and  to  frown  upon  the 
first  indications  of  any  such  active  zeal  for  the  truth  as 
threatened  to  disturb  the  sinister  tranquillity  which  they 
so  fondly  cherished.  It  was,  under  God,  mainly  due 
to  the  fidelity,  courage,  and  faith  in  God,  displayed  by 
our  unpretending  country  pastors  and  elders,  that  the 
Church  was  rescued  from  the  devices  which  were  formed 
respecting  her. 

Such  is  an  outline  of  the  system  of  organizations  and 
influences,  which  conspired  against  the  Presbyterian 
Church.  It  was  not,  indeed,  designed  to  rend  her  to 
pieces,  to  dissolve  her  organization  or  diminish  her 
numbers.  On  the  contrary,  the  authors  of  the  policy 
dazzled  their  imaginations  with  visions  of  a  national 
Church,  as  comprehensive  in  its  embrace  as  the  ambi- 
tious "  national  societies"  by  which  it  was  to  be  de- 
veloped; and  which  were  to  shine  and  thrive  in  the 
light  of  its  greatness.  The  churches  of  New  England, 
the  Presbyterian  Church,  the  Reformed  Dutch,  the 
Scotch,  German,  and  Associate  Reformed, — these  all, 
were  to  be  included.  And  not  these  alone.  Prospects 
undefined  and  boundless  opened  to  the  imaginations  of 
the  patrons  of  these  schemes.  But  the  magnificent 
conceptions  thus  pictured  to  fancy,  were  to  be  realized 


340  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

at  the  expense  of  all  that  is  worth  holding  dear,  in 
the  Presbyterian  Church, — her  scriptural  and  saving 
faith,  and  her  divinely  originated  and  symmetrical 
order.  The  design  was  entertained  and  avowed  to 
alter  the  Confession  of  Faith.  On  this  subject,  the 
E,ev.  Dr.  J.  L.  Wilson  thus  testifies  : 

"  The  first  declaration  of  this  kind,  which  I  shall 
notice,  was  made  by  an  agent  of  the  American  Home 
Missionary  Society;  who,  by  his  movements,  first 
opened  my  eyes,  to  perceive  the  real  designs  of  the  ISJ^ew 
School.  He  said, — not  to  me,  but  to  other  persons ; 
one  of  whom  was  so  startled  as  to  reveal  the  secret ; — 
He  said,  holding  the  Confession  of  Faith  in  his  hand, — 
^  In  a  few  years,  we  will  have  the  majority ;  and  then 
we  will  alter  this  book  as  we  please.' 

"  Another  declaration  was  made  to  me,  in  my  own 
pulpit.  I  was  speaking  to  the  gentleman,  about  some 
erroneous  opinions  advanced  in  a  sermon  he  had  just 
delivered.  He  said,  ^  In  less  than  twenty  years,  there 
will  not  be  a  Confession  of  Faith  containing  more  than 
three  articles.'  This  gentleman  ranks  with  the  mode- 
rates; and  is  a  leading  man,  in  some  parts  of  the 
Churcli.  This  is  in  perfect  accordance  with  the  fact 
that  so  many  brief  Confessions  of  Faith  have  been 
recently  published,  both  East  and  West,  and,  in  some 
places,  substituted  for  the  standards  of  the  Presbyterian 
Church."* 

In  fact,  in  many  parts  of  the  Church, — wherever  the 
Plan  of  Union  prevailed, — these  abbreviated   Confes- 
sions were  in  vogue,  and,  in  a  great  measure,  superseded 
the  Westminster  formularies.     In  1836,  a  member  of 
*  Wilson's  One  Proposition,  p.  12. 


THE   CONGEEGATIONALIZING  SYSTEM.  341 

the  Assembly,  from  the  Western  Reserve,  was  found  to 
be  entirely  unacquainted  with  the  Confession  of  Faith ; 
and  was  induced  to  purchase  and  take  home  a  copy,  by 
a  member  of  the  Presbytery  of  Ohio,  who  ascertained 
that  the  book  would  be  a  curiosity,  not  to  him  only, 
but  to  some  of  his  Presbyterian  neighbors. 

The  idea  of  an  alteration  of  the  Confession  of  Faith, 
so  as  to  admit  of  a  more  easy  comprehension  of  diverse 
sentiments,  and  consequent  increase  of  accessions  to  the 
body,  was  not  a  mere  passing  suggestion  of  the  less  con- 
siderate and  influential,  but  was  seriously  cherished,  by 
some  of  the  most  considerable  persons  in  the  Church. 

As  the  members  were  returning  from  the  Assembly 
of  1836,  two  parties  of  them  spent  a  night  in  rooms 
adjoining ;  separated  by  nothing  but  a  plank  partition. 
In  one  of  these  rooms  were  two  of  the  most  distin- 
guished New  School  doctors ;  and  in  the  other,  the  Rev. 
Samuel  G.  Winchester,  and  the  Rev.  James  A.  Peabody, 
Financial  Secretary  of  the  Board  of  Education.  The 
attention  of  the  latter  was  suddenly  arrested,  by  a  remark 
made  in  the  adjoining  room,  in  a  tone  so  unguarded 
that  they  were  involuntary  hearers.  "  If  the  doctrine 
of  election  were  out  of  the  Confession  of  Faith,"  said 
the  speaker,  "  what  a  glorious  career  would  be  before 
our  Church  !"  "  It  is  too  soon,"  was  the  reply ; — "  The 
people  will  not  bear  it,  yet."  The  interlocutory  was 
here  interrupted,  by  the  voice  of  Winchester,  warning 
the  speakers,  that  they  were  overheard. 

Such  was  the  ulterior  design ;  and  in  the  mean  time, 
the  emphasis  of  the  " sydem^^  in  the  ordination  pledge 
served  almost  the  same  purpose. 

Whilst  a  system  so  comprehensive  was  organized,  for 

29* 


342  HISTORY  OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

ends  so  momentous  to  the  Church,  the  structure  was 
such  as  to  be  beyond  the  inspection  and  entirely  inde- 
pendent of  the  control  or  interposition  of  its  courts. 
The  friends  and  officers  of  the  American  Societies  were 
everywhere,  in  all  the  courts  of  the  Church,  ready  and 
vigilant,  to  seize  every  opportunity  to  tease,  and  criti- 
cise, and  harass  her  Boards ;  to  encumber  their  organi- 
zations, embarrass  their  action,  and  neutralize  their  ex- 
ertions. But  the  friends  of  the  Church  and  of  its 
Boards  had  neither  voice  nor  hearing,  in  the  councils 
of  the  societies.  The  condition  of  the  privilege  of 
speech,  in  those  councils,  was  a  liberal  pecuniary  pledge 
of  devotion  to  their  prosperity.  And,  even  this  was 
not  sufficient,  to  confer  a  right  to  vote  upon  their  affairs ; 
unless  the  zeal  of  the  giver  was  so  well  assured  as  to 
secure  his  enrollment,  by  a  vote  of  those  already  in 
possession  of  the  control. 

Said  a  writer,  in  1837  :  ^^  The  gratitude  of  Presbyte- 
rian candidates  is  secured,  and  a  consequent  modifica- 
tion of  their  sentiments  effected, — the  pecuniary  obli- 
gations are  held,  and  the  influence  consequent  on  such 
obligations  preserved, — the  young  men  from  New  Eng- 
land are  systematically  crowded  into  our  Church,  and 
our  judicatories  filled  with  those  who,  frequently,  have 
not  studied,  understood,  adopted,  or  even  read  our  stand- 
ards ; — and,  if  our  literary  and  theological  institu- 
tions are  free  from  the  influence,  it  must  be,  because,  if 
our  Presidents  and  Professors  are  not  more  than  men, 
they  are,  at  least,  more  than  other  men.  We  ask,  then, 
would  anv  other  sect  or  denomination,  besides  the  Pres- 
byterian  Church,  have  ever  endured  the  operation  of 
such  a  tremendous  moral  power ;  operating,  year  after 


THE   CONGEEGATIONALIZING   SYSTEM.  343* 

year,  within  its  ecclesiastical  jurisdiction?  Could  any- 
other  find,  among  themselves,  a  formidable  party,  to 
encourage  and  sustain  such  a  foreign  interference?"* 

The  history  of  the  Church  of  God  scarcely  exhibits 
a  more  signal  pledge  of  her  heaven-born  vitality,  and 
the  conservative  power  of  the  true  principles  of  doc- 
trine and  order,  with  which  Christ  has  endowed  her, 
than  is  presented  in  the  fact  that  our  Church  came  oif, 
wounded,  indeed,  and  scarred,  but  triumphant,  from 
the  struggle  with  the  tremendous  system  of  agencies, 
without  and  within,  by  which  she  was  beset,  and  seem- 
ingly overpowered.  Bound,  though  she  was,  with  seven 
green  withes ;  when  she  awoke  out  of  her  sleep,  they 
were  as  a  thread  of  tow,  touched  by  the  fire. 

*  Kev.  Thomas  D.  Baird,  in  the  Christian  Herald,  1837,  p.  119. 


CHAPTER  XXII. 

BARNES'     FIRST     TRIAL. 

The  Kev.  Albert  Barnes  —  His  sermon  on  the  The  Way  of  Sal- 
vation— Call  to  Philadelphia — Opposed  in  Presbytery — Discussion 
on  his  reception — Dr.  Ely  writes  Mr.  Barnes'  creed — Mr.  Barnes 
received — Charges  against  him  rejected — Action  of  Synod  on  com- 
plaint— Called  meeting  of  Presbytery — Dilatory  policy  of  Mr. 
Barnes'  friends — Examination  of  the  sermon — Committee  to  con- 
fer with  Mr.  Barnes — He  refuses  to  hear  them — Reference  of  the 
case  to  the  Assembly — Complaints  accompany  it,  from  the  friends 
of  Mr.  Barnes. 

Dr.  Taylor's  Concio  ad  Clerum  was  preached  in 
the  chapel  of  Yale,  on  the  lOtli  of  September,  1828. 
On  the  8th  of  February,  following,  a  discourse  was  de- 
livered, in  the  Presbyterian  church,  in  Morristown, 
New  Jersey,  which  fills  a  place  as  important  in  this 
history,  as  did  that  of  Dr.  Taylor,  in  the  annals  of  New 
England  theology.  The  preacher,  the  Eev.  Albert 
Barnes,  Avas  a  young  pastor,  whose  earlier  years  had  been 
passed  under  the  teachings  of  the  Methodist  Church. 
After  passing  through  college,  he  made  a  profession  of 
religion,  and  united  with  the  Presbyterian  Church.  A 
few  days  afterward,  he  entered  Princeton  Seminary,  as 
a  student  of  theology.  After  entering  upon  the  minis- 
try, he  became  pastor  of  the  church  in  Morristown. 
Here,   in    the   midst    of   an   awakening,    Mr.   Barnes 

344 


BARNES'  FIRST   TRIAL.  345 

preached,  from  Titus  iii.  4-7,  his  discourse  entitled 
"  The  Way  of  Salvation."  In  the  following  winter,  it 
was  published,  "  at  the  suggestion,  and  chiefly  at  the 
expense  of  a  few  friends ;  simply  with  the  hope  of  giv- 
ing a  more  fixed  impression  of  the  views  then  expressed." 
This  "  prefatory  advertisement"  was  dated,  December  26, 
1829,  more  than  ten  months  subsequent  to  the  delivery 
of  the  discourse ;  a  lapse  of  time,  which,  taken  with  the 
manner  and  avowed  motives  of  the  publication,  precluded 
the  plea  of  haste  or  inadvertence,  as  to  the  sentiments 
presented. 

At  this  time,  the  name  of  !Mr.  Barnes  was  before  the 
people  of  the  First  Church  in  Philadelphia,  as  successor 
to  the  E,ev.  Dr.  James  P.  Wilson;  who  was  then  in 
infirm  health,  and,  shortly  afterward,  died.  This  cir- 
cumstance at  once  directed  attention  to  the  sermon. 
The  Rev.  Wm.  M.  Engles  published,  in  the  Philadel- 
phian,  some  strictures,  in  which  he  placed  the  sermon 
and  the  Confession  in  juxtaposition,  and  showed  that, 
on  the  fundamental  points  of  original  sin  and  the  atone- 
ment, the  two  were  irreconcilably  at  variance.  A  reply 
soon  appeared,  from  the  pen  of  Dr.  Wilson ;  and  a  dis- 
cussion of  some  length  ensued,  between  the  reviewer 
and  the  defender  of  the  sermon. 

In  the  mean  time,  a  congregational  meeting  was  held, 
in  the  First  Church,  and  a  call  voted  to  Mr.  Barnes. 
This  call  was  submitted  to  the  Presbytery  of  Philadel- 
phia, at  its  stated  meeting,  in  April ;  and  leave  asked 
to  prosecute  it,  before  the  Presbytery  of  ElizabcthtoAvn. 
In  opposition  to  this  request,  the  venerable  Dr.  Green 
urged  the  erroneous  doctrines  of  the  printed  sermon. 
An  attempt  was  made  to  preclude  any  discussion  on  that 


346  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

discourse ;  on  the  ground  that  it  was  equivalent  to  an 
arraignment  and  trial  of  Mr.  Barnes^  for  heresy,  whilst 
he  was  beyond  the  jurisdiction  of  the  Presbytery.  This 
motion  was,  however,  rejected,  by  a  vote  of  thirty-seven 
to  ten  ;  and  the  discussion  proceeded.  The  objections 
urged  against  the  sermon  were, — that,  whilst  it  purports 
to  state  the  way  of  salvation,  no  mention  is  made  of  the 
cardinal  doctrine  of  justification; — that  the  author  con- 
temptuously rejects  the  doctrine  of  the  imputation  of 
Adam's  first  sin ;  that  he  intimates  that  the  first  moral 
taint  of  the  creature  is  coincident  with  his  first  moral 
action';  that  he  denies  that  Christ  sustained  the  penalty 
of  the  law  ; — that  he  affirms  that  the  atonement  had 
no  specific  reference  to  individuals,  and  secured  the 
salvation  of  no  man  ; — that  he  limits  the  inability  of 
the  sinner,  to  an  indisposition  of  Avill ; — and  that  he 
declares  his  own  independence  of  all  formularies  of  doc- 
trine ;  notwithstanding  his  professed  adoption  of  the 
Confession  of  Faith.* 

On  the  part  of  those  who  favored  the  call,  there  was 
a  studied  evasion  of  the  doctrinal  issue.  The  Rev.  Dr. 
Thomas  McAuley,  the  Rev.  Mr.  Sanford,  Dr.  Ely,  and 
others,  admitted,  in  general  terms,  that  there  were  some 
things  in  the  sermon,  equivocal,  and  some  erroneous. 
But,  it  was  denied  that  the  Presbytery  had  any  right  to 
inquire  into  Mr.  Barnes'  doctrinal  views ;  and  much 
was  said  of  his  excellent  character  and  piety.  The  cry 
of  "  Persecution  !"  was  raised ;  and  the  imprudence,  of 
offending  a  church  so  influential  and  important  as  the 
First,  was  pointed  out.    Dr.  Green  and  the  Rev.  Joshua 

*  Engles'  True  and  Complete  Narrative,  p.  8. 


BARNES'  FIRST   TRIAL.  347 

T.  Russell,  the  President  and  Secretary  of  the  Board  of 
INIissions,  were  admonished  that  the  Board,  would 
suffer,  in  consequence  of  the  part  they  took  in  opposi- 
tion,— a  threat  to  which  the  subsequent  history  gave  pro- 
found significance. 

Upon  the  question,  permission  to  prosecute  the  call 
was  granted,  by  a  vote  of  twenty-one  to  twelve.  The 
minority  entered  a  protest,  in  which  they  set  forth  the 
errors  in  doctrine  contained  in  the  sermon.  To  this  no 
reply  was  made. 

On  the  18th  of  June,  following,  a  special  meeting  of 
the  Presbytery  was  held,  "  for  the  purpose  of  consider- 
ing the  subject  of  the  reception  of  the  Rev.  Mr.  Barnes, 
and  to  do  what  may  be  deemed  proper,  in  his  installa- 
tion." This  meeting  was  not  held  in  the  customary 
place,  but  in  the  lecture-room  of  the  First  church,  ap- 
parently with  a  view  to  exert  an  influence  on  the 
minority  of  Presbytery.  Upon  the  presentation  of  Mr. 
Barnes'  testimonials  of  dismission  from  the  Presbytery 
of  Elizabethtown,  it  was  moved  that  he  be  received  as 
a  member.  After  some  discussion.  Dr.  Ely  moved, 
"  that  the  motion  now  under  consideration  be  post- 
poned :  that,  before  deciding  on  it,  any  brother  of  the 
Presbytery,  who  may  deem  it  necessary,  may  ask  of  the 
Rev.  Mr.  Barnes  such  explanations  of  his  doctrinal 
views  as  said  brethren  may  deem  necessary."  This 
motion  was' rejected. 

In  the  course  of  the  discussion  which  followed,  Mr. 
Barnes  rose,  and  proposed  to  make  some  explanations 
of  his  doctrinal  views.  This,  he  said,  he  was  willing 
to  do,  voluntarily,  but  not  in  compliance  with  a  demand  ; 
which  he  held  the  Presbytery  had  no  right  to  make. 


348  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

In  making  these  explanations,  he  occupied  some  five 
minutes.  He  acknowledged  that  his  sermon  was  defec- 
tive, through  oversight,  on  the  doctrine  of  justification. 
And  yet,  its  theme  was,  the  way  of  salvation !  His 
further  remarks,  shed  no  light  on  the  questionable  pas- 
sages ;  but  only  tended  to  confirm  the  conviction  that 
his  views  were  radically  at  variance  with  the  Con- 
fession. 

At  another  point  in  the  discussion,  Mr.  Barnes 
joined  with  Dr.  Ely,  in  a  proceeding,  but  little  to  the 
credit  of  either  party.  Dr.  Ely  having  constructed  a 
series  of  ambiguous  statements,  on  the  points  at  issue ; 
he  was  authorized  by  Mr.  Barnes  to  submit  them  to  the 
Presbytery,  as  an  exhibition  of  the  faith  of  the  latter. 
The  paper  thus  submitted,  ^^  with  the  approbation  and 
signature  of  Mr.  Barnes,^^  was  couched  in  the  following 
terms  : — 

"  That  he  does  believe  and  teach, 

"  1.  That  God  regarded  and  treated  /^dam,  in  the 
garden  of  Eden,  not  as  an  insulated  individual,  but  as 
the  head  and  father  of  all  his  race ;  so  that  his  trial  was 
a  virtual  trial  of  all  his  race,  and  his  sentence  a  virtual 
sentence  on  his  race. 

"  2.  That,  by  a  divine  constitution,  such  a  relation 
subsisted  between  Adam  and  every  one  of  his  posterity, 
that  his  first  act  of  sinning  was  to  secure,  and,  by  acting 
in  this  relation,  Adam  did  secure,  the  bringing  of  every 
descendant  of  Adam  into  an  estate  of  sin  and  misery, 
in  which  it  was  rendered  morally  certain  that  they 
would  righteously  suffer  all  the  evils  which  God 
actually  brings  upon  them ;  and  would,  every  one  of 


BARNES'  FIRST   TRIAL.  349 

them,  so  soon  as  capable  of  moral  agency,  commence  a 
course  of  sinful  moral  agency,  which  would  be  inter- 
rupted by  nothing  but  regeneration. 

"  3.  That  there  is  something,  whether  it  be  called, 
tendency,  disposition,  prinGiple,  or,  depramty,  in  man, 
which  renders  it  certain,  as  a  result  from  Adam^s  fall, 
that  the  first  moral  action,  and  every  subsequent  one, 
of  every  descendant  of  Adam,  by  natural  generation, 
wall  be  sinful,  until  the  subject  of  this  depravity  is 
transformed  by  the  Holy  Ghost. 

"  4.  That  this  depravity  of  man  is  such  that  no  one 
of  our  race  ever  did,  or  ever  wdll,  repent  and  receive  the 
Lord  Jesus  Christ,  without  being  both  persuaded  and, 
spiritually  and  morally,  enabled  by  the  Holy  Ghost 
so  to  do. 

"  5.  That  all  men,  in  their  native  state,  possess  all 
the  requisite  natural  faculties  for  serving  God  perfectly  ;. 
but  are  wholly  destitute  of  that  right  disposition,  or 
moral  nature,  which  is  requisite  to  the  serving  of  him 
acceptably. 

"  6.  That  Christ  suffered,  in  the  place  and  stead  of 
sinners;  and  that  believers  are  justified,  or  judicially 
declared  to  be  righteous,  solely  and  entirely  on  account 
of  Christ's  vicarious  righteousness,  and  of  his  exclusive 
merits ;  which,  after  they  have  been  given  to  the  be- 
liever, are  judicialli/  reckoned,  and  in  this  sense  im- 
puted to  him. 

"  7.  That  the  doctrine  of  justification  should  have 
been  more  distinctly  and  prominently  brought  forth,  in 
his  sermon ;  and  that  the  omission  of  it  was  probably 
owing  to  this  truth,  that  he  had  never  any  difficulty,  in 
his  own  mind,  on  the  subject,  and  that  no  controversy 

30 


350  HISTOEY   OF   THE   :NEW   SCHOOL.     ' 

existed,  in  the  place  of  his  former  charge,  about  this  all- 
important  doctrine. 

"  8.  That  Christ  did  not  suffer  the  identical  pains, 
which  sinners  would  have  suffered  ;  and  in  ihis  sense  he 
was  not  punished]  but  that,  in  the  stead  of  sinners,  he 
a  divine  and  human  person,  suffered  for  sinners,  that 
which  the  wisdom  and  justice  of  God  deemed  an  ade- 
quate equivalent,  or  vicarious  suffering,  to  satisfy  divine 
justice,  in  the  place  of  the  punishment  merited  by  the 
ungodly. ''* 

It  was  not  until  two  years  after  these  proceedings, 
that  the  "  Hawes  correspondence"  took  place ;  so  that 
to  Dr.  Ely,  is  to  be  awarded,  at  least,  the  palm  of 
originality,  in  the  device  here  exhibited.  One  thing, 
it  clearly  demonstrated  : — that  Mr.  Barnes  and  his 
friends  did  not  oppose  inquiry  into  his  theological  senti- 
ments, so  much  because  of  the  supposed  infringement 
upon  his  liberty, — for  that  point  was  surrendered  by 
the  very  presentation  of  this  paper, — as,  because  of  the 
embarrassing  questions  which  might  be  proposed, 
should  he  be  brought  under  examination ;  and  the  erro- 
neous sentiments  which  he  might,  thus  be  constrained 
to  avow.  It  was  easy  to  construct  phrases  of  very 
specious  seeming ;  if  no  one  were  allowed  to  ask  pre- 
cisely what  the  language  was  meant  to  convey  or  conceal. 

Dr.  Ely's  paper  was  evidently  designed  for  popular 
effect ;  and  no  doubt  served  its  purpose.  To  the  theo- 
logian, who  is  at  all  familiar  with  the  Pelagian  contro- 
versy; especially,  in  its  more  recent  New  Haven  phases, 

*  Complaint  of  the  minority  of  the  Presbytery  of  Philadelphia, 
(Dr.  Ely  and  others,)  presented  to  the  General  Assembly,  May  20, 
1831.  pp.  14,  8vo.,  p.  5. 


BARNES'  FIRST   TRIAL.  351 

the  creed  here  exhibited,  when  interpreted  in  the  light 
of  the  circumstances  in  which  it  originated,  is  an  avowal 
of  essential  agreement  with  the  system  of  the  New 
Haven  divines. 

After  several  days'  discussion,  ^Ir.  Barnes  was  re- 
ceived ;  by  a  vote  of  thirty  to  sixteen. 

The  Rev.  Brogun  Hoff  then  submitted  a  paper  of 
charges  against  him,  for  unsoundness  in  the  faith,  as  a 
bar  to  the  installation.  This  paper  the  moderator  pro- 
nounced to  be  out  of  order ;  as  being  the  introduction 
of  new  business,  at  a  pro  re  nata  meeting.  In  this  de- 
cision, he  was  sustained  by  the  house,  against  an  appeal 
taken  by  Dr.  Ely ;  who,  on  this  point,  sided  with  the 
minority.  All  obstacles  being  thus  overcome,  the 
requisite  arrangements  were  made ;  and,  on  the  25 th  of 
June,  Mr.  Barnes  was  installed. 

Against  these  proceedings,  the  minority  complained 
to  the  Synod  of  Philadelphia.  In  the  Synod,  the  case 
occupied  nearly  two  days  of  deliberate  investigation. 
In  the  course  of  it,  a  member  put  the  following  ques- 
tion,— "  Mr.  Barnes,  it  is  stated  in  one  of  the  answers 
of  our  Shorter  Catechism  that  ^  The  sinfulness  of  that 
estate  whereinto  man  fell  consists  in  the  guilt  of  Adam's 
first  sin,  the  want  of  original  righteousness,  and  the 
corruption  of  his  whole  nature,  which  is  commonly 
called,  original  sin.' — Mr.  Barnes,  do  you  believe  this  ?" 
To  which  Mr.  Barnes  replied,  "  I  do  not." 

The  Synod,  after  a  full  hearing  of  all  the  parties,  in- 
cluding the  reading  of  an  elaborate  paper,  by  Mr. 
Barnes,  decided,  by  a  large  majority,  to  sustain  the 
complaint ;  condemned  the  Presbytery  of  Philadeljihia, 
for  not  allowing  the  examination  of  Mr.  Barnes,  in  con- 


352  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW  SCHOOL. 

nection  with  his  printed  sermon,  previously  to  his  re- 
ception ;  and  referred  the  com]3lainants  back  to  the 
Presbytery,  with  an  injunction  to  it  ''  to  hear  and  decide 
on  their  objections  to  the  orthodoxy  of  the  sermon  of 
Mr.  Barnes,  and  to  take  such  order,  on  the  whole  sub- 
ject, as  is  required  by  a  regard  to  the  purity  of  the 
Church,  and  its  acknowledged  doctrines  and  order." 

Such  changes  had  now  taken  place,  in  the  Presbytery, 
that  the  opposers  of  the  new  theology  were  in  a  decided 
majority.  Upon  the  adjournment  of  Synod,  a  system 
of  tactics  was  commenced  by  the  minority,  with  the 
design  to  nullify  the  decision  of  Synod  and  defeat  the 
majority  of  Presbytery,  over  the  details  of  which  we 
draw  the  veil  of  silence. 

At  first,  the  attempt  was  made  to  carry  matters  by  a 
surprise  movement,  at  an  adjourned  meeting,  which,  as  it 
happened,  was  appointed  for  some  purpose,  twenty-five 
hours  after  the  adjournment  of  the  Synod  at  Lancaster. 
This  failing,  and  the  subject  being  made  the  occasion 
of  a  called  meeting,  nearly  three  days  were  spent  in 
dilatory  motions,  designed  to  preclude  all  action,  unless 
the  Presbytery  would  surrender  the  principle,  that  it 
had  a  right  to  examine  and  jndge  the  sermon  of  Mr. 
Barnes,  apart  from  any  judicial  process  against  the 
author.  When,  at  length,  the  obstacles  thus  interposed 
were  overcome,  and  the  Presbytery  was  about  to  proceed 
to  an  examination  of  the  sermon,  the  minority  entered 
a  protest,  declaring  such  a  proceeding  unconstitutional, 
and  that,  if  persisted  in,  ^^  the  undersigned  must  with- 
draw from  all  participation  in  such  proceedings,  and 
complain  to  the  next  General  Assembly."  In  the* 
sequel,  however,  it  appeared  that  this  withdraAval  merely 


BARNES'  FIRST  TRIAL.  353 

meant  silence  on  the  doctrinal  questions,  involved  in 
the  discussion.  The  protesting  members  claimed,  and 
exercised,  freely,  the  right  to  take  part  in  all  questions 
of  order;  and,  in  a  word,  whenever  any  opportunity 
occurred,  to  embarrass  the  proceedings.  They  also 
asked,  and  the  Presbytery  granted  them  the  right  to 
dissent,  protest  and  complain,  against  its  proceedings ; 
which,  otherwise,  they  could  not  have  done,  as  willfully 
refusing  to  take  part  in  them. 

As  the  discussion  of  the  sermon  was  about  to  com- 
mence, Mr.  Barnes  inquired,  whether  he  had  a  right  to 
appeal  to  the  Assembly,  and  thus  arrest  the  proceedings. 
Being  answered  in  the  negative,  he  presented  a  paper, 
avowing  the  authorship  of  the  sermon,  and  offering 
himself  for  trial ;  either  on  the  ground  of  common 
fame,  or,  upon  charges  made  by  a  responsible  accuser, 
or  accusers.  This  request  the  Presbytery  declined  to 
grant ;  for  reasons  which  were  entered  at  length  on  the 
minutes.  Mr.  Barnes,  then,  asked  leave  of  absence 
from  the  remaining  sessions.  He  stated  that  he  was 
confident  of  being  able  to  make  such  explanations  of 
his  sermon  as  would  satisfy  the  Presbytery  of  its  entire 
harmony  with  the  Confession  of  Faith ;  but,  that,  upon 
advising  with  his  friends,  he  had  determined  not,  then, 
to  do  it !  His  request  was  granted,  at  the  same  time 
that  he  was  most  importunately  entreated,  by  Dr.  Green 
and  others,  to  remain,  and  give  the  explanations,  which 
he  professed  himself  so  able  to  do,  and  which  ^vere  so 
necessary  to  the  peace  of  the  Church. 

He  had,  previously,  asked  whether  he  was  entitled 
to  vote,  upon  the  questions  involved  in  the  examination 
of  the  sermon.      This  question  was  answered  in  the 

30* 


354  HISTOEY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

negative, — a  decision  undoubtedly  erroneous ;  and  which 
was  carried,  by  the  the  votes  of  his  own  party,  with  a 
few  others,  against  the  prevalent  sentiments  and  votes 
of  the  majority. 

At  length,  the  Presbytery  was  allowed  to  proceed  to 
examine  the  sermon,  and  a  paper  offered  by  Dr.  Green 
w^as  read  by  paragraphs,  amended  and  adopted.  In 
this  paper,  the  sermon  was  charged  with  errors  of  a 
dangerous  tendency,  on  some  principal  points  of  Chris- 
tian theology ;  especially,  on  original  sin,  the  atonement 
and  justification. 

It  was  now  moved  by  Mr.  Engles,  ^^  that  Dr.  Green, 
Mr.  McCalla,  and  Mr.  Latta,  be  a  committee  to  wait  on 
Mr.  Barnes,  to  communicate  to  him  the  result  of  the 
deliberations  of  this  Presbytery,  in  the  examination  of 
his  sermon,  and  to  converse  with  him,  freely  and  affec- 
tionately, on  the  points  excepted  to,  in  that  sermon ;  in 
the  hope  and  expectation,  that  the  interview  will  result 
in  removing  or  diminishing  the  difficulties  which  have 
arisen  in  his  case ;  and  that  they  report  at  the  next 
meeting  of  Presbytery." 

The  minority  had  been  silent,  during  the  doctrinal 
discussion.  They  now  resumed  activity,  and  opposed 
this  motion,  as  involving  a  direct  insult  to  Mr.  Barnes. 
It  was,  however,  adopted  by  the  Presbytery ;  where- 
upon the  minority  gave  notice  of  complaint  to  the 
General  Assembly. 

The  committee  took  an  early  opportunity  to  wait  on 
Mr.  Barnes,  at  his  studv,  in  a  bodv.  He  received  them 
with  courtesy  ;  but  refused  to  hold  any  communication 
with  them,  as  a  committee,  on  the  subject  of  their 
appointment ;  but  said  that  he  was  willing  to  converse 


BAENES'    FIEST   TRIAL.  355 

with  them,  individually,  and  in  a  private  capacity. 
After  remaining  about  an  hour,  they  rose  to  leave; 
when  he  handed  them  a  paper,  stating  the  reasons  of 
his  refusal.  These  were,  in  brief,  the  asserted  uncon- 
stitutionality of  the  course  of  the  Presbytery ;  and  his 
unwillingness,  by  any  act,  to  recognize  it  as  of  binding 
force. 

The  committee  made  repGu^t  of  these  facts  and  sub- 
mitted Mr.  Barnes'  written  answer,  to  .  Presbytery,  at 
the  stated  meeting,  in  Aj^ril,  1831.  After  discussion, 
it  was  resolved  to  refer  the  whole  case  to  the  General 
Assembly.  The  reference  was  accompanied  with  com- 
plaints from  Mr.  Bradford  and  from  the  minority 
against  these  proceedings.  In  the  latter  paper,  the 
former  majority  give  the  following  account  of  the 
impropriety  of  their  own  action,  in  refusing  to  enter- 
tain the  charges,  as  a  bar  to  the  installation  : — 

"  jS^o  sooner  had  Mr.  Barnes  been  received  by  this 
Presbytery,  on  the  23d  of  June,  than  a  paper,  contain- 
ing formal  charges  against  him,  for  unsoundness  in  the 
faith,  and  signed  by  Aslibel  Green,  D.J).,  the  Kev. 
AVm.  M.  Engle's,  the  Rev.  George  C.  Potts,  the  E,ev. 
Alexander  Boyd,  the  Rev.  Brogun  Hoff,  the  Rev.  A. 
H.  Parker,  the  Rev.  Charles  Williamson,  and  others, 
was  presented  to  Presbytery,  'with  a  view  to  arrest  the 
installation;  and  it  was  decided  by  the  Moderator,  that 
the  paper  containing  the  charges  could  not  be  admitted, 
at  a  special  meeting,  as  the  commencement  of  a  trial ; 
because  out  of  order.'  This  decision,  the  undersiirned, 
of  whom  the  Moderator  referred  to  is  one,  now  judge 
to  have  been  incorrect;  because  that  special  meeting 
was  called,  not  only  to  receive  Mr.  Barnes,  but  to  trans- 


356  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW  SCHOOL. 

act  any  business  relative  to  his  installation.  These 
charges  should  have  been  constitutionally  disposed  of, 
either  by  declaring  them  irrelevant,  or  by  taking  the 
requisite  steps  for  trying  Mr.  Barnes  on  the  same.''* 

It  will  be  remembered  that  these  charges  were  only 
tabled,  as  a  last  resort,  in  bar  of  the  installation,  after 
the  Presbytery  had  utterly  refused  to  allow  an  exami- 
nation, eitlier  of  Mr.  Barnes  or  his  sermon.  These 
brethren  now  acknowledge  that  the  refusal  to  entertain 
those  charges  was  a  violation  of  the  rights  of  the  mem- 
bers presenting  them.  Yet  they  now  complain  to  the 
Assembly,  because  the  brethren  thus  injured  did  not 
accept  of  the  false  position  in  which,  by  this  confessedly 
wrongful  act  they  were  placed ;  and  prosecute  Mr. 
Barnes^  after  installation,  upon  charges  which,  upon 
the  face  of  them,  were  seen  to  have  been  tabled  '^  with 
a  view  to  arrest  the  installation."  Furthermore,  these 
parties  complain  to  the  Assembly  against  their  breth- 
ren, for  exercising  a  right  of  examination,  conferred 
upon  them  by  a  judicial  decision  of  the  Synod;  against 
which,  if  these  complainants  felt  aggrieved  by  it,  their 
only  proper  remedy  was  in  an  appeal  from  the  Synod  to 
the  Assembly.  Failing  of  this,  they  were  utterly  with- 
out a  reasonable  pretext  for  opposing  the  proceedings 
of  the  Presbytery;  much  more,  for  complaint  to  the 
Assembly. 

If  the  case  was  to  be  decided  upon  its  merits,  by  the 
suj^reme  tribunal,  the  complainants  had  small  prospect 
of  success.  Their  confidence  was  based  on  other  grounds ; 
and  was  not  disappointed. 

*  Complaint  from  the  Minority,  etc.,  pp.  14,  8vo.,  p.  6. 


CHAPTER  XXIII. 

THE     ASSEMBLY     OF     1831. 

Preparations  for  the  Assembly  of  1831 — Peters'  "  Plea  for  Union  in 
tlie  West" — Publications  on  Barnes'  case — Dr.  Beman's  Southern 
tour — The  New  Haven  Spectator — The  Assembly  of  1831 — Dr. 
Beman,  Moderator — His  theological  position — Clement  Tuttle,  a 
committee-man — Barnes'  case — Committee  of  reference — The  re- 
port— Demand  of  Mr.  McCalla — The  report  forced  through — 
Breckinridge's  protest — Mr.  Bacon's  comment  on  this  transaction. 

As  the  time  drew  on  for  the  meeting  of  the  General 
Assembly  of  1831,  measures  were  skillfully  adopted  to 
give  it  such  a  complexion  as  would  subserve  the  pur- 
poses of  the  apologists  for  Mr.  Barnes,  and  the  enemies 
of  the  Boards  of  the  Church.  The  reply  of  the  Board 
of  Missions,  to  the  communication  of  the  Presbytery 
of  Cincinnati,  on  the  project  of  union,  was  published 
in  the  Cincinnati  Journal,  at  the  request  of  one  of  the 
committee  to  whom  it  was  addressed,  on  the  12th  of 
November.  This  publication  was  immediately  seized 
as  the  occasion  for  a  series  of  six  letters  from  the  pen 
of  Dr.  Peters,  which  appeared  in  the  same  paper,  in  the 
course  of  December  and  January.  These  letters  were 
entitled,  "  A  Plea  for  Union  in  the  West,^'  and  pur- 
ported to  make  developments  of  tlie  most  startling 
character,  involving  charges,  against  the  Board  and  its 
officers,  of  a  course  of  systematized  chicanery,  fraud  and 

357 


358  HISTORY   OF   THE   KEW   SCHOOL. 

falsehood^  running  through  its  publications,  and  espe- 
cially premeating  its  annual  report.  Respecting  them, 
the  writer  says, — "  We  know  that  such  an  exposure 
may  occasion  a  malignant  satisfaction,  in  the  minds  of 
oj^posers,  and  we  regret  its  necessity,  especially,  at  the 
present  time,  when  the  eyes  of  an  infidel  world  are 
watching  with  eagerness  for  the  halting  of  Christians. 
But,  if  the  enemies  of  Christianity,  and  of  the  benevo- 
lent efforts  of  the  day,  must  have  occasion  to  reproach 
the  professed  followers  of  Christ,  let  them  be  compelled 
to  do  so,  in  full  view  of  the  fact,  that  ourselves  are  the 
first  to  expose  every  error,  in  the  Church,  or  its  mem- 
bers, which  cannot  be  otherwise  corrected.  It  is  our 
solemn  impression,  that  no  fears,  as  to  the  consequences, 
ought  to  bear  the  weight  of  a  feather  against  our  high 
and  holy  obligations  as  Christians,  to  provide  things 
honest  in  the  sight  of  all  men.  I  cannot,  therefore,  con- 
vince myself  that,  on  account  of  the  delicacy  of  my 
official  relations,  it  is,  any  longer,  my  duty,  as  an  indi- 
vidual, to  shrink  from  the  responsibilities  of  a  step, 
which  a  just  regard  to  the  honor  and  purity  of  our 
benevolent  institutions  appears  so  imperiously  to  de- 
mand."* 

What  shall  we  think  of  the  state  of  mind  of  the 
writer  who  could  pen  such  a  sentence  as  this ;  and  then 
set  himself  to  work  with  the  utmost  ingenuity, — by 
garbled  extracts,  by  torturing  a  foreign  meaning  out  of 
the  plainest  language,  and  by  suppression, — to  make 
out  a  case  that  should  persuade  the  Christian  public 
and  the  world,  that  the  Board  of  Missions,  its  Execu- 
tive Committee  and  its  Secretary,  had  conspired  to  im- 
*  Dr.  Peters'  Fifth  letter,  in  his  "  Brief  Answer,"  etc.,  p.  42. 


THE   ASSEMBLY   OF    1831.  359 

pose  upon  the  Church,  by  the  most  clumsy  deceptions 
and  palpable  falsehoods?  This,  too,  was  at  a  time 
^vhen,  if  the  character  of  the  venerable  president  of  the 
Board,  Dr.  Green,  were  left  out  of  the  account,  two  of 
the  most  eminent  of  New  School  divines,  were  involved 
in  all  the  responsibility, — the  Kev.  Dr.  Thomas  H. 
Skinner,  one  of  the  three  officers  of  the  Board;  and 
the  Rev.  Dr.  Thomas  McAulcv,  one  of  the  three  min- 
isterial  members  of  the  Executive  Committee. 

The  officers  of  the  Board  were  Rev.  Dr.  Ashbel 
Green,  President,  Rev.  Joshua  T.  Russell,  Correspond- 
ing Secretary,  Rev.  Thomas  H.  Skinner,  Recording 
Secretary.  The  Executive  Committee  were  Drs.  Green 
and  McAuley,  and  Mr.  Russell,  with  Messrs.  James 
Moore,  Solomon  Allen,  Geo.  W.  Blight,  and  Furman 
Leaming. 

In  the  sixth  letter  of  this  series,  the  writer  stated 
that  it  had  hitherto  been  a  leading  object  of  his  endea- 
vors "to  persuade  the  contending  parties,"  the  Board 
and  the  Society,  "to  become  one;"  and  says, — "on 
this  object,  '  my  heart  is  fixed.^ "  "  What  measures 
ought  now  to  be  adopted,  I  do  not  feel  prepared  even 
to  suggest.  So  far  as  the  Western  States  are  concerned, 
I  trust  our  brethren,  on  the  ground,  will  be  prepared 
to  express  their  wishes  to  the  next  General  Assembly ; 
or,  that  they  will  adopt  other  measures  to  secure  that 
harmony  of  action,  so  essential  to  the  peace  of  the 
churches,  and  the  permanent  prosperity  of  the  mission- 
ary work." 

Thus,  whilst  a  desperate  assault  was  made  upon  the 
truth  and  integrity  of  the  Board, — an  assault  designed 
utterly  to  destroy  the  confidence  of  the  churches  in  the 


360  HISTOEY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

honesty  and  management  of  that  institution, — its  union 
with  the  Home  Society  was  announced,  as  the  fixed  in- 
tent of  the  Secretary ;  and  the  rallying  call  was  uttered, 
to  all  the  dependants  and  friends  of  the  Society,  to  be 
prepared  to  secure  that  union,  in  the  West,  through  the 
General  Assembly. 

The  "  Plea  for  Union'^  was  republished,  in  the  IN^ew 
York  Evangelist.  The  Board,  under  date  of  March 
2d,  1831,  published  an  '^Official  Reply,"  to  the  letters, 
in  a  pamphlet  of  32  pages.  Dr.  Peters,  at  once,  rejoined, 
Under  date  of  April  25,  in  a  "  Brief  Answer,"  consisting 
of  a  48  page  pamphlet,  including,  in  an  appendix,  the 
Six  Letters  and  other  papers. 

Whilst  the  American  Home  Missionary  Society  was 
thus  marshaling  its  forces  for  the  Assembly,  an  equal 
activity  was  displayed  by  the  advocates  and  apologists 
of  Mr.  Barnes  and  the  New  England  theology.  Shortly 
after  Mr.  Barnes'  installation,  in  June,  1830,  a  pamph- 
let was  published  in  New  York,  entitled,  "  A  Sketch  of 
the  Debate  and  Proceedings  of  the  Presbytery  of  Phila- 
delphia, in  regard  to  the  Installation  of  the  Pev.  Albert 
Barnes."  This  pamphlet,  was  written  in  a  thoroughly 
partisan  spirit.  It  concealed  the  weak  points  of  the  ad- 
vocates for  Mr.  Barnes,  while  it  exhibited  his  opponents 
in  the  most  invidious  light,  as,  at  once  weak  and  malig- 
nant. At  the  same  time,  the  religious  papers,  all  of 
which  were  in  the  interest  of  the  New  School  party, 
or  of  Moderatism,  teemed  with  similar  representations. 
Some  three  months  after  the  publication  of  the  Sketch, 
the  Rev.  Mr.  McCalla  appeared  in  a  pamphlet  narrative 
of  the  proceedings,  and  review  of  the  Sketch.  After 
the  judgment  of  the  Synod^  and  the   final  action  of 


THE   ASSEMBLY   OF    1831.  361 

Presbytery  under  it,  Dr.  Ely  published,  in  liis  paper, 
the  Philadelphian,  such  a  history  of  the  proceedings  as 
was  best  calculated  to  vindicate  Mr.  Barnes  and  his 
friends.  This  drew  from  Mr.  Engles,  the  Clerk  of 
Presbytery,  *^  A  True  and  Complete  Narrative,"  pub- 
lished in  pamphlet  form.  Through  the  winter  of 
1830-31,  the  Philadelphian  was  occupied  with  this  sub- 
ject ;  two  numbers  of  which,  containing  elaborate  pa- 
pers by  Mr.  Barnes,  were  scattered  broadcast  and  sent 
to  the  most  of  the  Presbyterian  ministry,  througliout 
the  country. 

Whilst,  thus,  in  Philadelphia,  New  York,  and  Cin- 
cinnati, every  nerve  was  strained,  to  secure  an  Assembly 
favorable  to  Mr.  Barnes,  and  to  the  Home  Missionary 
Society, — the  Rev.  Dr.  Beman  was  spending  the  winter 
in  an  extensive  tour  at  the  South.  He  subsequently 
denied,  most  emphatically,  any  ulterior  objects  in  that 
tour.  "  My  only  object  in  this  tour,  was  the  restoration 
of  my  health.'''^  The  fact,  however,  was  developed,  that 
whilst  he  and  the  Rev.  Dr.  Spring  were  in  the  lobby 
of  the  Assembly  room,  awaiting  the  vote  which  placed 
him  in  the  Moderator's  chair,  he  stated  to  Dr.  Spring 
that  he  had  known,  three  months  before,  that,  if  he 
should  be  a  member  of  the  Assembly,  and  present  at 
its  opening,  an  effort  would  be  made  to  make  him 
Moderator ;  and,  that  there  were  "  eight  votes  he  had 
lost,  from  the  absence  of  members  from  Virginia." 
With  reference  to  these  statements.  Dr.  Green  per- 
tinently demanded,  in  reply  to  disavowals  of  preconcert 
made  by  Dr.  Beman  and  others, — "  Could  this  possibly 
take  place,  without  preconcert,  and  a  good  deal  of  it 

*  Beman's  Appeal,  p.  28. 
31 


362  HISTORY   OF   THE    NEW   SCHOOL. 

too  ?  Could  he  be  sure  that  eight  members  from  Vir- 
ginia would,  if  present,  vote  for  him,  if  there  had  been 
no  preconcert  ?  Are  we  to  believe  that  at  the  Synod  in 
Winchester,  he  spent  his  whole  time  in  religious  exer- 
cises, and  entered  into  no  preconcert,  in  regard  to  '  men 
and  measures,^  in  the  next  Assembly?  Is  it  credible 
that  he  could  know,  three  months  before  the  Assembly, 
when  he  was  far  distant,  in  the  South,  what  he  says  he 
did  know,  if  there  had  not  been  some  special  communi- 
cation between  him  and  his  party  at  the  North  ?  And 
does  such  a  correspondence  consist  with  an  open,  public, 
and  honest  denial  of  all  plan  and  preconcert  whatsoever  ?'' 
In  addition  to  the  other  appliances,  which  were 
brought  to  bear  upon  this  important  Assembly,  the  in- 
fluence of  New  Haven  was  called  into  requisition.  Mr. 
Barnes  was  a  contributor  to  the  pages  of  the  Christian 
Spectator;  and,  now,  its  editors  identified  themselves 
with  his  cause.  The  number  for  June  appeared  a 
month  in  advance,  so  as  to  anticipate  the  meeting  of 
the  General  Assembly;  to  the  members  of  which  it 
conveyed  a  very  earnest  plea  in  behalf  of  Mr.  Barnes 
and  his  theology.  "  We  hope,''  said  the  Spectator,  '^  it 
will  not  be  thought  unkind  or  improper  to  remind  those 
who  seem  bent  on  driving  Mr.  Barnes  from  the  Pres- 
bytery of  Philadelphia,  that  they  are  taking  upon  them- 
selves a  responsibility  of  no  ordinary  character ;  since 
the  principle  on  which  they  act,  if  carried  into  full 
operation,  must  create  a  total  disruption  in  the  Presby- 
terian Church  throughout  the  United  States;  and  a 
consequent  sacrifice,  to  an  immense  extent,  of  some  of 
the  dearest  interests  of  the  Redeemer's  kino^dom,  both 
at  home  and  abroad.  We  state  the  subject  thus  strongly, 


THE   ASSEMBLY    OF    1831.  36 


o 


because  every  one,  we  suppose,  understands  that  the 
cas*e  of  Mr.  Barnes  is  not  that  of  an  individual.  The 
real  question  at  issue  is  whether  Neio  England  Calvinism 
shall  any  longer  he  tolerated  in  the  Presbyterian  Church 
of  this  GountryJ^  To  enforce  this  consideration,  and  to 
aid  in  the  management  of  Mr.  Barnes'  case,  in  the 
Assembly,  the  Rev.  Mr.  Bacon,  one  of  the  Xew  Haven 
gentlemen,  was  commissioned  as  delegate  from  the  As- 
sociation of  Connecticut. 

When  the  Assembly  of  1831  convened,  it  presented 
the  largest  body  of  commissioners  that  had  ever  met, 
in  the  supreme  court  of  our  Church.  Two  hundred 
and  twenty-seven  members  were  in  attendance, — fifty- 
two  more  than  were  in  any  previous  Assembly.  In  it, 
the  New  School  party  first  appeared,  in  distinct  and 
embodied  organization  ;  marshaled,  as  were  its  forces, 
by  the  combined  and  powerful  motives  of  zeal  for  the 
cause  of  jNIr.  Barnes,  and  hostility  to  the  Board  of  INIis- 
sions,  originating  in  devotion  to  the  system  of  volun- 
tary societies,  and  intensified  by  the  doctrinal  position 
of  the  Board,  as  indicated  by  its  rejection  of  the  Ten- 
nessee Hopkinsians,  and  by  the  activity  of  the  Presi- 
dent and  Secretarv,  in  the  case  of  Mr.  Barnes. 

The  first  test  of  ])arty  strength  was  in  the  election  of 
INIoderator.  Dr.  Beman  was  the  nominee  of  the  New 
School  party ;  and  it  is  remarkable,  that  the  only 
Moderator  whom  that  party  ever  succeeded  in  electing 
to  the  chair  should  have  been  this  gentleman.  His 
entrance  into  tlie  ministrv  of  the  Presbvterian  Church 
would  appear  to  have  been  by  one  or  other  of  the 
arrangements  for  the  convenience  of  Congregationalists  ; 
as,  the  fact  was,  with  some  difficulty  elicited  from  him, 


364  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

by  Mr.  Baird,  in  the  Assembly  of  1832,  that  he  had 
never  adopted  the  Confession  of  Faith.  We  have 
already  seen  how  fully  he  was  identified  with  the 
preaching  and  measures  of  Mr.  Finney,  which  were  no- 
where received  with  more  favor  than  in  Dr.  Beman's 
pulpit.  He  was  already  the  author  of  a  published 
volume  of  sermons  on  the  atonement,  in  which  the 
scheme  of  the  younger  Edwards  is  explicitly  developed 
and  defended.  Repudiating  the  doctrine  of  the  Con- 
fession, that  justice  was  fully  satisfied  in  the  redemption 
of  Christ,  he  accepts  Dr.  Edwards'  argument  that  if 
this  be  so.  '^  grace  and  pardon  are  out  of  the  question,'^ 
salvation  is  of  debt.  He  follows  that  divine  in  classify- 
ing justice,  as,  commutative^  which  has  respect  to  com- 
mercial transactions,  the  payment  of  pecuniary  obliga- 
tions, etc. ;  distributive,  which  "  respects  the  moral 
character  and  conduct  of  creatures ;  and  consists  in 
rewarding  or  punishing  them,  according  to  their  merit 
or  ill  desert;"  and  public,  or  general,  justice,  which 
^'  has  no  direct  reference  to  law ;  but  embraces  those 
principles  of  virtue  and  benevolence  by  which  we  are 
botmd  to  govern  our  conduct ;  and  hy  which  God  him- 
self governs  the  universe." 

According  to  Dr.  Beman,  this  last  kind  of  justice, 
which  ''  has  no  direct  reference  to  law,"  and  is  therefore, 
as  Dr.  Edwards  confesses,  properly,  no  justice,  is  that 
which,  alone,  is  satisfied  in  the  atonement.  "  Distribu- 
tive justice,  as  expressed  in  the  law,  has  received  no 
satisfaction  at  all ;"  and  its  uncanceled  sentence  will 
for  ever  stand  against  the  redeemed  in  heaven.  ^'  The 
whole  legal  system  has  been  suspended,  at  least,  for  the 
present,  in  order  to  make  way  for  the  operation  of  one 


THE   ASSEMBLY   OF    1831.  365 

of  a  different  character."  Christ  suffered  "  not  on  legal 
principles,  but  by  express  stipulation  or  covenant  with 
the  Father."  And  the  design  was,  not  to  satisfy  j  ustice, 
but  to  make  an  exhibition  of  God's  abhorrence  of  sin, 
which  should  exert  such  a  moral  influence  on  the 
created  intelligences,  that  justice  may  be  set  aside,  and 
sin  may  be  pardoned,  in  consistency  with  the  general 
welfare  of  the  universe.  In  this  sense,  the  atonement 
is  rejiresented  as  a  substitute  for  the  infliction  of  the 
penalty  of  the  law;  and  the  sufferings  of  Christ  are 
therefore  called  "  vicarious  sufferings." 

That  this  theory  is  at  direct  variance  with  the  Con- 
fession of  Faith,  is  apparent.  That  it  completely  over- 
turns the  gospel  scheme,  and  renders  the  justification 
of  the  sinner  impossible,  is  equally  evident;  as  we 
have  seen. 

It  is,  also,  in  open  contradiction  to  the  plainest  teach- 
ings of  Scripture,  and  the  very  words  of  the  Son  of 
God,  himself.  Dr.  Beman  asserts  that  the  "  law  has 
received  no  satisfaction,  at  all.  The  whole  legal  system 
is  suspended,  in  order  to  make  way  for  the  operation  of 
one  of  a  different  character."  The  prophet  says,  "  He 
will  magnify  the  law  and  make  it  honorable."  The 
Son  himself  testifies,  "  I  am  not  come  to  destroy,  but 
to  fulfill.  For,  verily,  I  say  unto  you,  till  heaven  and 
earth  pass,  one  jot  or  one  tittle  shall  in  no  wise  pass 
from  the  law,  till  all  be  fulfilled."  And  Paul  declares 
that  he  was  "  made  of  a  woman,  made  under  the  law, 
to  redeem  them  that  were  under  the  law." 

Such  were  the  leading  principles, — we  do  not  trace 
the  details, — of  Dr.  Beman's  published  theology.  Yet 
was  he,  beyond  question,  the  most   honored  and  influ- 

31* 


366  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

ential  leader  in  the  New  School  body.  Dr.  Peters,  by 
virtue  of  his  official  patronage,  might  control  more  votes. 
Dr.  Richards  may  have  stood  higher  in  personal 
character.  But  Dr.  Beman  was  the  trusted  leader,  the 
marshal  of  the  host,  on  every  occasion  of  emergency, 
from  1831,  when  he  was  called  to  the  Moderator's 
chair,  in  view  of  the  great  interests  then  at  stake,  until 
1838,  when  he  was  again  called  to  that  office,  to  pre- 
side over  the  incipient  proceedings,  in  the  withdrawal 
of  the  New  School  body  from  the  Assembly  and  the 
ChuiJch. 

In  organizing  the  Assembly  of  1831,  no  leader  could 
have  been  selected,  who  was  personally  more  interested, 
or  one  more  prompt  and  skillful  in  the  direction  and 
management  requisite  to  the  jiurposes  cherished  by  the 
party,  in  that  Assembly. 

At  the  very  threshold  of  its  proceedings,  an  illustration 
was  presented  of  the  growing  confidence  of  disorder  shel- 
tering itself  under  the  Plan  of  Union.  Mr.  Clement  Tut- 
tle  appeared,  with  a  commission  from  tlie  Grand  River 
Presbytery,  designating  him  as  '^  committee-man,"  to  sit 
in  the  Assembly.  The  case  was  referred  to  a  Com- 
mittee of  Elections,  which  declined  to  express  any 
opinion  as  to  the  constitutional  right  of  such  a  person 
to  a  seat.  The  Assembly,  however,  after  considerable 
discussion,  resolved  that  he  be  received  and  enrolled. 

Immediately  upon  the  organization,  the  case  of 
Mr.  Barnes  presented  itself,  in  the  complaints  made 
against  the  proceedings  in  that  case, — and  in  the  refer- 
ence from  the  Presbytery.  These  papers  were  sent  to 
the  judicial  committee;  which,  subsequently,  reported 
the  complaints  as  in  order.    A  proposition  was,  at  once, 


THE   ASSEMBLY   OF    1831.  367 

made  to  refer  the  matter  to  a  committee,  to  see  if  the 
case  could  not  be  disj)osed  of,  without  a  hearing.  The 
Assembly,  however,  proceeded  to  hear  the  complaint 
and  the  records  in  the  case. 

Dr.  Miller,  then,  moved  a  reference,  with  the  consent 
of  the  parties.  Dr.  Green,  on  behalf  of  the  Presby- 
tery, asked  a  postponement  for  a  day,  that  he  might 
have  opportunity  to  confer  ^vith  the  other  members  of 
the  Presbytery's  committee.  This,  the  Assembly  re- 
fused to  grant.  A  hasty  conference  was  then  had, 
among  those  members  of  the  committee  who  hap- 
pened to  be  in  the  house,  and  Dr.  Green  announced 
that  they  acquiesced  in  the  reference.  Judge  Darling, 
one  of  the  committee  to  prosecute  the  complaint,  in- 
quired,— "  Is  it  to  be  understood,  that  the  whole  busi- 
ness is  given  up  entirely  into  the  hands  of  the  Assem- 
bly ?  Is  it  understood  that  neither  of  the  parties  shall 
have  anything  further  to  say,  in  the  business  ?  Is  the 
business  placed  precisely  in  that  state  in  which  it  would 
be,  had  both  parties,  at  this  moment,  spoken  until  they 
were  satisfied  ?"  The  earnestness  with  which  this  point 
was  urged,  should  have  aroused  the  suspicions  of  the 
defence.  But  they  seem  to  have  been  altogether  blind 
to  the  trap  into  which  they  were  about  to  fall. 

To  Judge  Darling's  questions,  a  member  of  the 
house  replied,  by  explaining  that  the  parties  relinquish 
all  claim  to  be  heard, — the  committee,  in  their  report, 
will  bring  the  subject  before  the  Assembly,  when  it  will 
be  discussed  and. disposed  of.  The  same  justice  will  be 
done  the  parties  as  if  they  had  been  fully  heard.  "  He 
was  not  for  covering  up  questions  of  such  importance 
as  the  case  involved.     Sooner  than  this  should  happen, 


368  HISTOEY   OF   THE   KEW   SCHOOL. 

he  would  see  the  Assembly  divided  this  moment ;  and 
the  ties  by  which  they  were  now  dubiously  held,  rent 
asunder/^'*' 

After  this  explanation,  in  which  all  acquiesced,  "  the 
parties  agreed  to  submit  the  case,  without  argument. 
It  was,  then,  resolved  to  refer  it  to  Dr.  Miller,  Dr. 
Matthews,  Dr.  Lansing,  Dr.  Fisk,  Dr.  Spring,  Dr.  J. 
McDowell,  Mr.  Bacon,  Mr.  E.  White,  Mr.  Jessup,  and 
Mr.  Napier,  as  a  select  committee.'^ 

The  mouths  of  the  parties  being  now  sealed,  this 
committee,  and  the  Assembly,  under  its  guidance,  pro- 
ceeded to  dispose  of  the  case,  without  any  regard  to  the 
provisions  of  the  Constitution,  for  judicial  cases.  Hav- 
ing got  rid  of  that  rule  which  provides  that  the  parties 
shall  be  fully  heard,  all  its  further  provisions  were 
treated  with  indifference.  The  roll  was  not  called ;  nor 
were  the  members  permitted  any  discussion  of  the  case. 
The  question  was  not  taken,  upon  sustaining  the  com- 
plaint ;  nor  was  any  one  point,  involved  in  the  case, 
brought  to  a  judicial  decision. 

The  committee  brought  in  a  minute,  embracing  the 
following  resolutions : — 

'^Resolved,  That  the  General  Assembly,  whilst  it  ap-, 
predates  the  conscientious  zeal  for  the  purity  of  the 
Church  by  which  the  Presbytery  of  Philadelphia  is 
believed  to  have  been  actuated,  in  its  proceedings  in 
the  case  of  Mr.  Barnes ;  and  whilst  it  judges  that  the 
sermon  by  ]Mr.  Barnes  entitled  '  The  Way  of  Salvation,' 
contains  a  number  of  unguarded  and  objectionable  pas- 
sages;  yet  is  of  the  opinion, ,  that,  especially,  after  the 
explanations,  which  were  given  by  him,  of  those  pas- 

'^  Presbyterian,  183],  p.  G3. 


THE   ASSEMBLY   OF    1831.  369 

sages,  the  Presbytery  ought  to  have  suffered  the  whole 
to  pass  without  further  notice. 

"  Resolved,  That,  in  the  judgment  of  this  Assembly, 
the  Presbytery  of  Philadelphia  ought  to  suspend  all  fur- 
ther proceedings,  in  the  case  of  Mr.  Barnes. 

^^  Resolved,  That  it  will  be  expedient,  as  soon  as  the 
regular  steps  can  be  taken,  to  divide  the  Presbytery,  in 
such  a  way,  as  will  be  best  calculated  to  promote  the 
peace  of  the  ministers  and  churches  belonging  to  the 
Presbytery. 

*'  With  respect  to  the  abstract  points,  proposed  to  the 
Assembly,  for  their  decision,  in  the  reference  of  the 
Presbytery,  the  committee  are  of  the  opinion  that,  if 
they  be  answered,  they  had  better  be  discussed  and  de- 
cided, in  thesi,  separate  from  the  case  of  Mr.  Barnes." 

When  this  report  was  made  to  the  Assembly,  the 
Pev.  Wm.  L.  McCalla  handed  the  Moderator  a  paper, 
wdiich  he  wished  to  read  to  the  house.  The  Moderator, 
Dr.  Beman,  looked  through  it,  and  then  stated  to  the 
house  that  it  was  a  plea  in  Mr.  Barnes'  case  ;  and,  there- 
fore, out  of  order.  He  admitted  that  it  was  perfectly 
decorous  in  its  language ;  and  a  motion  was  made  that 
it  be  read.  This  motion  the  Moderator  refused  to  put. 
An  appeal  was  taken,  and  the  Moderator  was  sustained. 
Had  the  paper  been  read,  it  would  have  appeared  that 
its  nature  had  been  misstated.  It  was  not  a  plea  in 
the  case,  but  a  demand  to  be  heard.  Mr.  INIcCalla  had 
been  out  of  the  liouse,  when  the  other  members  of  the 
committee  Avaived  their  rio-lit. 

"  I  now  come  before  you,"  said  he,  in  this  paper, 
^'  humbly  to  claim  an  opportunity  to  perform  the  duty 
which  it    [the  commission  from  Presbytery]    devolves 


370  HISTORY   OF   THE    NEW   SCHOOL. 

upon  me.  .  .  .  Many  of  the  members  of  the  Assembly- 
believe  that  the  want  of  an  authentic  answer  to  the 
complaint  will  rob  our  judges  of  that  information  which 
they  need,  and  have  a  right  to  demand.  The  complaint 
is  a  protracted  and  highly  argumentative  document. 
As  the  Presbytery  never  saw  it,  they  will  expect  their 
commissioners,  to  answer  it,  for  them.  My  colleagues 
neither  possess  nor  claim  the  right  of  depriving  me  of 
this  privilege,  without  my  consent ;  any  more  than  I 
have  a  right  of  compelling  them  to  exercise  it,  without 
their  consent.  When  my  momentary  absence,  at  the 
time,  can  be  shown  to  be  so  disorderly  or  disrespectful 
as  to  deprive  me  of  my  commission,  then,  and  then 
only,  let  my  Presbytery  be  cut  off  from  a  hearing.  .  .  . 
I  am  willing  to  be  precluded  from  the  handling  of  all 
books  and  papers,  whatever ;  with  the  single  exception 
of  my  interleaved  copy  of  the  printed  complaint.  .  .  . 
I  am  willing  to  see  the  complainants  furnished  with  all 
the  books  and  papers  which  they  may  think  necessary; 
while  I  shall  be  allowed  no  other  help  than  the  Spirit 
of  Jesus,  and  the  complaint  above  mentioned.  Let 
them  be  cheered  with  the  smiles  of  popular  favor,  and 
let  me  appear  under  the  lowering  frowns  of  an  over- 
whelming majority.  Only  allow  me  the  constitutional 
right  of  speaking  for  Christ  and  his  people,  and  I  am 
satisfied.  If  refused,  I  call  heaven  and  earth  to  wit- 
ness, that  the  complainees  are  denied  a  hearing,  which 
they  earnestly  -solicit,  and  to  which  they  are  entitled,  by 
the  laws  of  God  and  man.  Mav  our  covenant  God 
direct  to  proper  measures,  and  a  proper  decision.''* 
To  this  letter,  the  Assembly,  misled  as  to  its  contents, 
*  The  Letter,  in  the  Presbyterian,  1831,  p.  63. 


THE   ASSEMBLY   OF    1S31.  371 

refused  to  listen.  Members  attempted  to  canvass  the 
report  of  the  committee;  but  were  arrested  with  the 
admonition  that,  to  reopen  the  subject  would  involve 
deplorable  consequences,  which,  however,  were  unde- 
fined. The  body  was  blindfolded,  and  the  report  of  the 
committee,  which  was  satisfactory  to  none,  was  forced 
through,  with  but  few  dissenting  voices. 

It  was  then  moved,  that  the  Assembly  unite  in 
thanksgiving  for  the  harmonious  result  to  which  they 
had  come,  and  imploring  the  blessing  of  God  on  their 
decision.  The  motion  was  adopted,  and  Dr.  Fisk  led 
in  prayer. 

Amid  these  proceedings,  one  earnest  voice  was  raised 
in  indignant  protest.  Robert  J.  Breckinridge,  a  young 
lawyer  and  elder,  from  Kentucky,  with  a  manner  sig- 
nificant of  profound  emotion,  expressed  his  horror  at 
vAvdt  had  been  done.  He  declared  that  both  parties 
had  acted  against  the  dictates  of  their  consciences;  those 
who  thought  with  Mr.  Barnes,  in  voting  to  condemn, 
as  "  unguarded  and  objectionable"  sentiments  which 
they  thoroughly  approved,  and  had,  in  their  speeches, 
CFidorsed ; — and  his  opponents,  in  disapproving,  as 
merely  incautious  expressions,  what  they  believed  to  be 
dangerous  errors ;  and  in  censuring  the  Presbytery,  for 
what  they,  in  their  hearts,  believed  to  have  been  a  most 
proper  course  of  action.  "  We  have  agreed  to  bury 
the  truth,"  said  Mr.  Breckinridge ;  "  and  before  two 
year=;,  God  will  correct  us  for  it." 

It  needed  but  one  thing  more  to  fill  up  the  measure 
of  indignity  done  to  the  Presbyterian  order  of  our 
standards,  and  of  humiliation  to  our  Church, — thus 
bound  hand  and  foot  and  presented,  a  voluntary  sacri- 


372  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

• 

fice^  in  its  doctrines  and  government,  to  the  system  of 
our  Congregational  brethren.  The  cup  was  filled,  full 
and  running  over,  when  the  delegate  from  Connecticut, 
the  Rev.  Mr.  Bacon,  who  was  one  of  the  committee  on 
Mr.  Barnes'  case — after  assisting  to  betray  the  Assembly 
into  the  false  position  in  which  it  was  left, — went  home, 
and  published  to  the  world  his  scorn  for  the  Church 
which  dare  not  treat  the  case  according  to  its  own  prin- 
ciples ;  but  had  taken  refuge  in  the  Congregational 
mode  of  proceeding. 

"  I  suppose,"  said  he,  "  that  the  committee,  on  which 
I  was  named,  was  appointed,  not  to  try  the  case,  on 
Presbyterian  principles ;  but  rather,  to  act  as  a  council, 
for  the  settlement  of  the  controversy,  as  we  dispose  of 
difficulties  in  our  churches.  I  profess  myself  unskilled 
in  the  peculiarities  of  Presbyterian  discipline ;  but  if  I 
understand  your  book,  your  way  is,  to  try  such  a  case 
by  hearing,  not  only  the  documents,  but  the  parties, 
and  to  decide  it,  not  by  proposing  terms  of  reconcilia- 
tion, but  by  giving  a  direct,  distinct,  and  conclusive 
answer,  to  every  question  involved  in  the  reference, 
complaint,  or  appeal.  This  I  suppose  would  have  been 
the  Presbyterian  method  of  proceeding,  in  the  case  of 
Mr.  Barnes.  But  this  course  was  not  adopted.  There 
was  a  reluctance,  in  a  part  of  the  Assembly,  against  a 
regular  trial  and  decision  in  the  case.  I  was  not  very 
well  acquainted  with  members  or  parties ;  but  this  I 
know,  the  men  who  feared  the  result  of  a  trial,  were 
some  of  them  men  of  great  respectability. 

"Not  even  the  venerable  editor  of  the  Christian 
Advocate,  will  charge  the  venerable  professor  on  whose 
repeated  motion  the  Assembly  at  last  consented  to  waive 


THE   ASSEMBLY   OF    1831.  373 

a  regular  trial,  with  being  engaged  in  any  conspiracy 
against  the  purity  of  the  Presbyterian  Church.  Yet 
the  fact  was,  Dr.  Miller  did  earnestly  deprecate  the  evils 
which  would  follow  a  regular  trial  and  decision ;  and, 
on  that  ground,  persuaded  the  parties  to  forego  their 
constitutional  rights,  and  to  submit  their  case,  without 
a  trial  •  in  the  expectaton  that  the  Assembly  would 
endeavor  to  find  some  ground  on  which  the  parties 
might  be  at  peace.  I  was  disappointed  at  this ;  and 
yet  I  rejoiced  in  it.  As  a  curious  observer,  I  was  dis- 
appointed, because  I  had  expected  to  see  the  practical 
operation  of  your  system  of  judicatories  and  appeals^ 
in  a  case  in  which,  if  it  has  any  superiority  over  our 
system  of  friendly  arbitrations,  that  superiority  would 
be  manifest.  As  a  Christian  brother,  I  rejoiced,  because 
I  verily  thought  that  the  proposal  was  a  wise  one,  and 
that  peace  could  be  better  secured  thus,  than  by  a  judi- 
cial decision,  after  a  regular  trial.  I  came  to  the  Gene- 
ral Assembly  disposed  to  learn  what  are  the  actual 
advantages  of  that  towering  system  of  ecclesiastical 
courts  which  constitutes  the  glory  of  Presbyterianism ; 
and,  of  that  power  to  terminate  all  controversies  which 
is  supposed  to  reside  in  the  supreme  judicature. 

"Of  course,  I  could  not  but  be  at  once  astonished 
and  gratified,  to  see  that  unconscious  homage  Avhich  was 
rendered  to  Congregational  principles,  when  Presby- 
terians of  the  highest  form,  pure  from  every  infection 
and  tincture  of  Independency,  untouched  with  any 
suspicion  of  leaning  toward  New  England,  strenuously 
deprecated  the  regular  action  of  the  Presbyterian  system, 
in  a  case  which,  of  all  cases,  was  obviously  best  fitted 
to  demonstrate  its  excellence.      I   was  astonished.     I 

32 


374  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

had,  indeed,  expected  that  the  voice  which  was  to 
answer  the  complainants  and  the  Presbytery  of  Phila- 
delphia, would  answer  out  of  the  whirlwind ;  biit  I 
had  supposed  that  consistency  in  those  brethren  would 
constrain  them  to  acknowledge  that  voice,  even  speak- 
ing from  the  whirlwind,  as  the  voice  of  the  only  legiti- 
mate arbiter. 

"  I  could  not  but  ask  within  myself, — What  is  this 
lauded  system  of  power  and  jurisdiction  worth — these 
judicatures,  court  rising  above  court,  in  regular  grada- 
tion,— what  are  they  worth,  if  you  are  afraid  to  try 
your  system  in  the  hour  of  need  ?  Yet,  when  I  heard 
those  brethren  arguing  in  favor  of  referring  the  matter 
to  a  select  committee,  which  should  endeavor  to  mediate 
between  the  parties,  and  to  propose  some  terms  of  peace 
and  mutual  oblivion, — in  other  words,  to  act  as  a  Con- 
gregational ecclesiastical  council  would  act,  iii  attempt- 
ing the  adjustment  of  any  similar  controversy,  I  was 
convinced  that  they  were  in  the  right.  And  when  the 
Assembly  and  the  parties  at  last  acceded  to  the  pro- 
posal, I  supposed  that  the  general  conviction  was,  that 
it  was  best  to  go  to  work,  on  that  occasion,  in  some- 
thing like  the  Congregational  way,  rather  than  in  the 
Presbyterian  way. 

"  Taking  this  view  of  the  object  for  which  the  com- 
mittee was  appointed,  and  entering,  as  I  did,  very 
happily  into  the  design,  I  never  suspected  that  my  not 
being  a  Presbyterian  disqualified  me  from  serving.  I 
supposed  that,  being  a  Congregationalist,  and  therefore 
not  wholly  unacquainted  with  such  methods  of  proceed- 
ing, I  was  only  the  better  fitted  to  assist  in  the  labors 
of  such  a  committee ;  and,  accordingly,  I  took  hold  of 


THE   ASSEMBLY   OF    1831.  375 

the  work,  with  a  disposition  to  assist  in  the  humble 
measure  of  my  ability."* 

Such  was  the  first  great  triumph  of  New  School 
policy,  in  alliance  with  the  party  of  moderation  and 
peace. 

*  Christian  Advocate,  1832,  p,  20. 


CHAPTER   XXIV. 

THE   WESTERN   MISSIONARY   QUESTION". 

Tlie  subject  in  the  Assembly  of  1831 — Keport  of  the  Board — Pro- 
posal for  union  in  the  West — Attempt  to  elect  a  hostile  Board — 
Excitement  in  consequence — Committee  of  compromise — Its  report 
adopted — Plan  of  carrespondence  in  the  West — Mr.  Thompson's 
circular — Plan  of  the  West  Lexington  Presbytery — Pittsburgh  con- 
ference— Cincinnati  Convention — Letter  from  ruling  elders  in  Port- 
age Presbytery — Proceedings  of  the  Convention — ''Report"  pub- 
lished by  the  minority — The  Old  School  committees  of  correspond- 
ence— The  "secret  circular" — Mr.  Baird's  review  of  the  Conven- 
tion— Pesult  of  the  Convention — The  Old  School  employ  the  press. 

The  subject  of  Domestic  Missions  came  before  the 
Assembly  of  18-31,  through  several  overtures,  on  mis- 
sions in  the  West,  and  through  the  annual  report  of  the 
Board.  In  the  report,  the  Assembly  was  informed  of 
a  year  of  most  successful  operations.  It  also  commu- 
nicated a  resolution  just  adopted  by  the  Board,  that 
"  in  humble  reliance  on  divine  Providence,  the  Board 
of  Missions  will  use  their  best  endeavors  to  supply,  in 
the  course  of  five  years,  every  vacant  Presbyterian  con- 
gregation, and  destitute  district,  which  may  be  disposed 
to  receive  aid  from  this  Board,  with  a  faithful  and  de- 
voted minister  of  the  gospel  of  Christ ;  and  they  do 
hereby  pledge  themselves  to  extend  prompt  and  effi- 
cient aid  to  all  feeble  congregations,  throughout  the 

376 


THE   WESTERN   MISSIONARY   QUESTION.  377 

Valley,  which  shall  apply  to  them  for  assistance,  with 
suitable  recommendations ;  and,  also,  to  send  into  this 
particular  field,  every  well-qualified  licentiate  or  minis- 
ter of  the  Gospel  who  may  hereafter  be  willing  to  en- 
gage in  this  work." 

Three  "friends  of  the  present  Board  of  iMissions" 
had  promised  the  sum  of  fifteen  thousand  dollars,  in 
five  annual  payments,  to  aid  in  fulfilling  this  pledge. 
The  evidence  thus  given  by  the  Board  and  its  friends, 
of  a  purpose  to  enter  with  determined  energy  into  the 
great  Valley  of  the  AVest,  which  the  American  Home 
Missionary  Society  was  so  earnestly  striving  to  possess, 
elicited  strong  indications  of  displeasure,  from  the 
majority  of  the  Assembly.  The  usual  vote  of  approval 
was  withheld.  Members  insisted  upon  the  striking  out 
of  that  part  of  the  report  which  respected  the  pledge ; 
but  it  was,  at  length,  resolved  that  with  the  suggestions 
made  by  the  committee,  which  denied  the  accuracy  of 
the  statements  of  the  report,  on  these  points,  "  it  be  re- 
turned to  the  Board  for  its  disposal." 

The  overtures  on  missions  in  the  West  were  referred 
to  a  committee,  which  reported  a  plan  for  union  with 
the  American  Society,  upon  the  basis  of  Dr.  Peters' 
Cincinnati  scheme. 

A  substitute  for  this  proposition  was  moved,  recom- 
mending the  Western  Synods  to  correspond  with  one 
another,  and  agree  upon  some  plan,  to  be  reported  to 
the  next  Assembly.  Pending  the  decision,  the  move- 
ments hostile  to  the  Board  reached  a  crisis. 

A  motion  had  been  made,  by  Dr.  Eichards,  that  a 
committee  should  be  raised  to   nominate  a  Board   of 
Missions.     Dr.  William  Wylie  moved  a  postponement 
32  * 


378  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

of  this,  to  make  room  for  a  motion  to  reappoint  the  old 
Board.  In  the  discussion,  the  Rev.  E.  N.  Kirk,  stated 
that  he  came  to  the  Assembly,  for  the  purpose  of  accom- 
plishing two  objects, — the  vindication  of  Mr.  Barnes, 
and  the  dismissal  of  Mr.  Russell,  from  the  service  of 
the  Board;  on  account  of  his  course  in  the  case  of  Mr. 
Barnes.  He  intimated  that  these  were  the  objects  of 
his  party,  and  that  candor  -required  their  avowal. 

The  means  on  which  the  party  relied  for  the  latter 
purpose,  was  the  election  of  a  new  Board,  which  was 
expected  to  amalgamate  with  the  American  Society. 

The  motion  to  appoint  a  nominating  committee  pre- 
vailed, by  a  vote  of  109,  to  87.  This  committee,  ap- 
pointed by  the  Moderator,  consisted  of  Rev.  Dr.  Asa 
Hilly er.  Rev.  T>.  H.  Riddle,  Rev.  Moses  Chase,  Rev. 
Asahel  Bronson,  Rev.  S.  Y.  Garrison ;  and  Elders 
William  Jessup  and  William  Anderson.  The  chair- 
man. Dr.  Hillyer,  was  a  member  of  the  Board  of  Direc- 
tors of  the  Home  Missionary  Society,  and  the  other 
members  were,  without  exception,  hostile  to  the  As- 
sembly's Board.  This  committee  soon  reported  a  list 
of  nominations,  in  which  the  friends  of  the  Home  Mis- 
sionary Society,  and  enemies  of  the  Boards  of  the 
Church  had  an  overwhelming  majority.  The  Old 
School  were  allowed  a  respectable  representation,  in  the 
distant  parts  of  the  Church.  But  of  the  members  from 
the  two  Synods  of  New  Jersey  and  Philadelphia,  which 
lay  immediately  adjacent  to  the  office  of  the  Board  in 
Philadelphia,  the  New  School  were  assigned  a  majority 
of  nearly  two  to  one.  Dr.  Green,  Mr.  Russell,  and  a 
few  others  of  the  old  friends  of  the  Board  were  retained. 
But  so  few  that  they  could  have  done  nothing;    and 


THE   WESTERN   MISSIONARY   QUESTION.  379 

their  continuance  was  believed  to  be  with  the  expecta- 
tion that  they  would  resign,  as  soon  as  the  changed 
complexion  of  the  Board  became  apparent. 

It  was  understood,  by  the  Old  School  members  of 
the  Assembly,  that  the  plan  was  to  have  the  new  Board 
meet,  at  once ;  while  the  Assembly  was  still  in  session, 
and  enter  into  such  a  treaty  with  the  American  Society 
as  would  bind  the  Church  to  that  institution.  When, 
therefore,  the  report  of  the  nominating  committee  came 
in,  it  occasioned  a  scene  of  intense  excitement  and 
confusion.  Various  motions  were  made;  and  many 
speakers  at  once  claimed  the  floor.  The  Moderator's 
authority  was  disregarded,  and  at  length  a  recess  of  ten 
minutes  was  resorted  to,  as  the  only  means  of  restoring 
the  house  to  order. 

After  the  recess,  the  Assembly  engaged  in  prayer  for 
the  divine  direction.  The  Rev.  Dr.  William  Patton, 
then,  offered  a  ^proposition,  upon  which  he  and  Dr. 
Spring  had  agreed,  during  the  recess,  as  a  compromise. 
It  consisted  in  reappointing  the  old  Board,  and  the 
adoption  of  the  resolution  then  pending,  as  to  the- plan 
for  missions  in  the  West.  The  Rev.  Elipha  White,  of 
Charleston,  S.  C,  opposed  the  continuance  of  the  old 
Board,  because  they  were  so  devoted  to  the  West  that 
they  would  neglect  the  South.  To  obviate  this  objec- 
tion. Dr.  Spring  pro^^osed  to  endeavor  to  raise  a 
thousand  dollars,  to  be  expended  by  the  Board  in 
the  South.  This,  Mr.  White  resented,  as  an  offered 
bribe ! 

A  committee  of  compromise  was  at  length  appointed, 
consisting  of  the  Rev.  F.  A.  Ross,  Dr.  Peters,  and  Mr. 
Jessup ;  Dr.  Green,  Dr.  Spring,  and  Mr.  Breckinridge. 


380  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW  SCHOOL. 

The  committee,  almost  immediately,  reported  the  fol- 
lowing minute : — 

"  In  view  of  existing  evils,  resulting  from  the  separ- 
ate action  of  the  Board  of  Missions  of  the  General 
Assembly,  and  the  American  Home  Missionary  Society, 
the  General  Assembly  recommends  to  the  Synods  of 
Ohio,  Cincinnati,  Kentucky,  Tennessee,  West  Tennessee, 
Indiana,  and  Illinois,  and  the  Presbyteries  connected 
with  the  same,  to  correspond  with  each  other,  and  en- 
deavor to  agree  upbn  some  plan  of  conducting  domestic 
missions,  in  the  Western  States,  and  report  the  result 
of  their  correspondence  to  the  next  General  Assembly ; 
it  being  understood  that  the  brethren  of  the  West  be 
left  to  their  freedom  to  form  any  organization  which, 
in  their  judgment,  may  best  promote  the  cause  of  mis- 
sions, in  those  States,  and,  also,  that  all  the  Synods  and 
Presbyteries  in  the  Valley  of  the  Mississippi  may  be 
embraced  in  this  correspondence,  provided  they  desire  it. 

''  Resolved,  by  this  Assembly,  that  the  present  Board 
of  Missions  be  reappointed." 

An-  attempt  was  made  to  strike  out  of  this  report,  the 
clause  proposing  to  embrace  all  the  Synods  and  Presby- 
teries, in  the  Valley  of  the  Mississippi,  provided  they 
desire  it ; — but  the  motion  was  rejected.  The  report 
was  then  adopted,  by  a  large  majority. 

The  plan  for  a  correspondence  of  the  western  judica- 
tories was  urged  upon  the  Assembly,  by  the  friends  of 
the  American  Society,  in  the  confidence  of  having  the 
control  in  those  bodies;  and  measures  were  at  once 
taken  to  secure  that  object.  Under  date  of  June  6th,  a 
communication  was  sent  from  Philadelphia,  by  a  num- 
ber of  the  western    members  of  the  Assembly  to  the 


THE   WESTERN   MISSIONARY   QUESTION.  381 

Rev.  John  Thompson  and  two  other  members  of  the 
Cincinnati  Presbytery,  appointing  them  a  committee  to 
organize  and  direct  the  correspondence.  They  were  ad- 
vised to  secure  the  appointment,  by  the  Presbyteries,  at 
their  fall  meetings,  of  delegates  to  meet  in  Cincinnati, 
"  with  all  other  friends  that  might  be  disposed  so  to 
do,"  to  determine  the  question  which  was  submitted  to 
them. 

In  fulfillment  of  this  appointment  and  plan,  Mr. 
Thompson  issued  a  circular  letter,  in  which  he  desig- 
nated Wednesday,  the  23d  of  November,  as  the  time 
for  the  proposed  convention.  After  indicating  the  de- 
sign of  the  convention, — to  determine  whether  any 
change  was  desirable  ;  and  if  any,  what, — he  stated  that, 
"  as  the  convention  meet  only  for  obtaining  information, 
for  mutual  prayerful  deliberation,  and  counsel,  it  is 
thought  best  to  leave  it  to  every  Presbytery  to  send  as 
many  delegates  as  they  choose,  or  may  find  convenient; 
allowing,  also,  any  intelligent  members  of  the  Presby- 
terian churches,  who  feel  a  deep  interest  in  the  mission- 
ary cause,  in  the  West,  to  attend  and  aid,  in  the  delibe- 
rations ;  if  they  observe  the  same  order  as  will  be 
expected  of  delegates  appointed  by  Presbyteries." 

Could  this  plan  have  been  carried  into  eifect,  the 
Convention  would  have  been  controlled  by  the  Xew 
School  of  Cincinnati.  Upon  the  publication  of  Mr. 
Thompson's  circular,  a  meeting  of  the  Presbytery  of 
West  Lexington  was  immediately  called.  After  two 
days'  deliberation,  it  unanimously  adopted  a  plan  for 
the  convention.  It  declared  it  desirable  and  expedient 
that  all  the  Presbyteries  in  the  Valley  be  represented  ; — 
that  their  representation  be  upon  the  ratio  to  which  they 


382  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

are  entitled  in  the  Assembly — that  if  distant  Presby- 
teries send  a  less  number  than  their  ratio,  they  be  enti- 
tled to  their  full  vote ; — that  if  any  Presbytery  be  un- 
able to  send  delegates,  it  forward  an  answer  to  the  ques- 
tion, ^^  To  what  plan,  for  conducting  missions  in  the 
Valley  of  the  Mississippi,  would  your  Presbytery  give 
the  preference  ?" — and  that  no  delegate  be  sent,  who  has 
not  been  regularly  ordained  to  the  ministry  or  eldership, 
after  taking  the  prescribed  obligations  to  the  Constitu- 
tion.    With  these,  were  other  subsidiary  regulations. 

The  clerk  was  directed  to  publish  this  plan  in  all  the 
papers ;  to  send  a  copy  to  the  stated  clerk  of  each  Pres- 
bytery in  the  Valley,  and  to  request  Mr.  Thompson  to 
co-operate  with  this  modified  arrangement.  Several 
other  Presbyteries  endorsed  the  plan  thus  modified ;  and 
in    accordance  with    it,  the  convention  was  organized. 

On  the  1st  of  September,  a  conference  was  held  in 
Pittsburgh,  in  response  to  a  published  call  to  the  mem- 
bers of  the  Synod,  of  that  name,  to  consult  as  to  their 
duty  in  the  premises.  There  were  present  members 
from  five  of  the  Presbyteries  of  that  Synod.  They  de- 
clared themselves  "decidedly  of  the  opinion  that  the 
General  Assembly  should  not  place  the  important  and 
precious  trust  of  missions  beyond  the  control  and  au- 
thority of  its  judicatories;  and  that  the  exigencies 
of  the  case  do  not  require  the  institution,  within  its 
bounds,  of  an  additional  Board  of  domestic  missions.'' 
They  also  declared  it  to  be  "  highly  expedient  to  co- 
operate with  the  western  brethren,  on  the  plan  recom- 
mended by  the  Presbytery  of  West  Lexington.^' 

Subsequently,  a  Pittsburgh  delegate  elect,  addressed 
a  written  inquiry  to  Mr.  Thompson,  whether  the  pre- 


THE   WESTERN   MISSIONARY   QUESTION.  383 

sence  of  the  delegation  from  that  Synod  was  expected 
or  desirable.     The  reply  was    in    the  affirmative. 

At  the  appointed  time,  the  convention  met,  in  the 
Third  Presbyterian  Church,  in  Cincinnati.  An  open- 
ing sermon  was  preached  by  the  Rev.  James  Gallaher, 
Eev.  Messrs.  T.  D.  Baird,  and  Gallaher,  and  R.  J. 
Breckinridge,  Esq.,  were  appointed  a  committee  of 
elections,  and  reported  forty-five  delegates  in  attendance, 
representing  twenty  Presbyteries.  The  Rev.  Dr.  James 
Blythe  was  chosen  Moderator,  and  Rev.  Messrs;  Samuel 
Steel  and  A.  O.  Patterson,  clerks. 

The  convention  continued  in  session  a  week.  Inci- 
dental to  its  main  business,  a  letter  was  received  and 
read  from  two  ruling  elders  in  the  Presbytery  of  Port- 
age, Messrs.  Joseph  Ewart  and  Robert  Baird,  elders  of 
the  congregation  of  Springfield.  They  stated  themselves 
to  be,  so  far  as  they  knew  or  believed,  the  only  elders 
in  the  entire  Presbytery,  the  only  persons  therefore  en- 
titled to  sit  as  such  from  that  Presbytery,  in  the  Con- 
vention, and,  as  they  dissented  from  the  mind  of  the 
Presbytery,  on  the  missionary  question,  they  took  this 
mode  of  expressing  their  dissent.  They  held  that  '*  The 
location  and  removal  of  ministers  and  pastors  belongs  to 
the  Church  as  such,  agreeably  to  the  Constitution  of  the 
Presbyterian  Church ;  and  we  believe  this  accords  with 
the  Word  of  God.  If  this  be  proper  and  needful,  in 
the  case  of  regularly  organized  congregations,  it  is  much 
more  necessary,  in  sending  missionaries  to  destitute  re- 
gions." "  Further,  as  we  apprehend  that  it  is  contem- 
plated to  form  a  missionary  organization  or  agency  at 
Cincinnati ;  even  though  a  majority  of  the  Convention 
be  opposed  to  it,  and  though  the  last  General  Assembly 


384  HISTORY   OF   TPIE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

recommended  that  the  result  of  the  correspondence  be 
reported  to  the  next  Assembly,  for  its  decision,  we  do 
here  record  our  entire  disapprobation  of  such  a  pro- 
cedure. We  consider  that  such  a  measure  would  be  a 
direct  violation  of  order,  renderino;  the  Convention  of 
none  eifect,  and  calculated  to  create  and  increase  division 
in  the  Church  of  Christ,  particularly  in  that  brancli  of 
it  over  which  we,  by  office,  and  solemn  covenant  obli- 
gations, are  appointed  as  watchmen.^'* 

The  apprehension  thus  expressed,  arose  no  doubt 
from  the  action  of  Grand  River  Presbytery,  which  was 
not  represented  in  the  Convention,  but  sent  on  a  com- 
munication, proposing  that  a  society  be  formed,  inde- 
pendent of  both  those  ah^eady  existing,  but  "to 
co-operate  with  either  or  both  of  them,  whenever  they 
may  think  best, — have  the  centre  of  their  operations 
at  Cincinnati  or  some  more  convenient  place ;  and  that 
this  society  be  formed  during  the  sitting  of  the  Conven- 
tion, by  such  members  as  approve  of  the  plan  ;  and  that 
measures  be  taken  to  commence  immediate  opera- 
tions."t 

It  was  apparent,  however,  from  the  .first  moment  of 
the  assembling  of  the  Convention,  that  the  Home 
Society  had  utterly  miscalculated  its  strength  in  the 
West.  Five  agents  and  missionaries  of  the  society 
were  members  of  the  Convention  ;  and  but  two  other 
ministerial  delegates  voted  with  them. 

On  the  third  day  of  the  sessions,  a  proposition  was 
made,  that  the  Assembly  organize  a  Western  Board  of 
Missions,  to  be  under  its  control  and  supervision,  inde- 
pendent, alike,  of  the  Society  and  of  the  existing 
^  Minutes  of  the  Convention,  jp.  5.  f  Ibid.,  p.  5. 


THE   WESTERN   MISSIONARY   QUESTION.  385 

Board ;  but  to  receive  pecuniary  aid  from  both.  This 
motion  was  rejected,  by  a  vote  of  twenty-eight  to  forty- 
ione ;  the  vote  being  counted  according  to  the  represen- 
tative ratio  of  the  Presbyteries.  Another  proposition 
was  made,  that  the  wrongs  done  on  both  sides  be  for- 
given and  forgotten,  and  both  the  Assembly's  Board 
and  the  American  Society  recommended,  as  deserving 
the  support  and  confidence  of  the  churches;  their 
amalgamation  being  pronounced  undesirable,  as  the  two 
would  do  more  good,  than  one.  This  was  rejected,  by 
a  vote  of  seventeen  to  fifty-two.  The  final  result  of  six 
days'    deliberations,    was    embodied    in    the   following 

minute : 

"  Whereas,  it  appears  from  the  report  of  the  com- 
mittee to  receive  and   report   all  written   communica- 
tions to  the  Convention,  that,  of  the  Presbyteries  in  the 
Valley  of  the  Mississippi,  fifteen,  entitled  to  forty-two 
votes,  have  not  been  heard  from  ;  that  one,  entitled  to 
tw^o  votes,  is  in  favor  of  the  American  Home  Missionary 
Society ;  that  one,  entitled  to  four  votes,  is  in  favor  of 
both  Boards,  as  they  4iow  exist ;  that  two,  entitled  to 
eight  votes,   are   in  favor  of  an  independent  Western  , 
society  ;  that  one,  entitled  to  two  votes,  is  in  favor  of 
ecclesiastical  supervision;    and  that  seven,  entitled  to 
twenty-two  votes,  are  in  favor  of  the  General  Assem- 
bly's  Board,  in  its   present  organization ;  and  whereas 
twenty  Presbyteries,    entitled    to    seventy  votes,  being 
actually    present    in   the    Convention,    a  plan    for   the 
establishment  of  a  Western  Board  of  Missions,  under 
,  the  care  of  the  General  Assembly,  after  a  full  discus- 
sion, has  been  rejected,  by  a  vote  of  forty-one  to  twenty- 
eight  ;  and  as  it  appears  to  the  Convention,  from  these 

33 


386  HISTORY   OF   THE   IsEW   SCHOOL. 

facts,  that  no  arrangement,  into  which  we  can  possibly 
enter,  is  likely  to  reconcile  conflicting  views  on  the  sub- 
ject; that,  so  far  from  healing  divisions,  or  restoring 
peace  to  the  churches,  by  any  new  expedients,  they 
v/ould  only  tend  to  multiply  the  points  of  difference, 
and  increase  the  evil, — therefore, 

'^  Hesolvedj  That,  under  these  circumstances,  they 
deem  it  inexpedient  to  propose  any  change  in  the 
General  Assembly's  mode  of  conducting  missions ;  as 
they  fully  approve  of  that  now  in  such  successful  opera- 
tion ;  and  that  the  purity,  peace,  and  prosperity  of  the 
Presbyterian  Church  materially  depend  on  the  active 
and  efficient  aid  the  sessions  and  Presbyteries  under  its 
care  may  afford  to  the  Assembly's  Board/'* 

The  minute  was  adopted ;  by  fifty-four  ayes,  to 
fifteen  noes.  The  following  resolution  was  then 
offered : — 

"  That  this  Convention,  notwithstanding  the  prefer- 
ence avowed  for  the  Assembly's  Board  of  Missions, 
unite  with  the  General  Assembly  of  the  Presbyterian 
Church  in  feelings  of  regard  -and  affection  for  the 
American  Home  Missionary  Society;  and  rejoice  in  the 
hope  tliat  by  the  aid  of  that  society  many  of  the  desti- 
tute churches  in  the  Valley  of  the  Mississippi  will  be 
supplied  with  the  stated  preaching  of  the  gospel,  and 
many  souls  converted  to  God."t 

This  resolution  was  indefinitely  postponed,  by  a  vote 
of  forty-two  to  seventeen.  After  taking  order  for  the 
publication  of  its  proceedings,  the  Convention,  then, 
adjourned. 

Before  separating  the  minority  appointed  a  committee, 
*  Minutes  of  the  Convention,  p.  13.  f  Ibid.,  p.  16. 


THE   WESTEEN   MISSIONARY   QUESTION.  387 

to  draw  up  and  publish  a  statement  of  reasons  of  dis- 
satisfaction with  the  decisions.    This  committee,  speedily 
issued  a  "  Report,"  in  a  pamphlet  of  forty-eight  pages. 
They  complained  g^rievously  of ''  the  paramount  and  con- 
trolling influence,  in  the  C'onvention,  of  the  Synod  of 
Pittsburgh:"  that  Synod  not  being  one  of  the  seven 
specified  in  the  minute  of  the  Assembly,  under  which 
the  Convention  was  called.     One  of  the  committee,  by 
whom  this  report  was  prepared  and  published,  was  the 
Eev.  Daniel  W.  Lathrop,  of  the  Synod  of  the  Western 
Reserve,  which  was  no   more  specifically  named  in  the 
Assembly's  minute  than  was  the  other.     But  both  were 
included    in    the   provision,  which  the   Assembly,  ex- 
pressly, refused  to  strike  out  of  the  minute,  that  any 
other  Synods  and  Presbyteries  in  the  Valley,  besides 
those  named  should  "  be  embraced  in  the  correspond- 
ence, if  thev  desire  it." 

Other  complaints,  made,  in  the  report,  were,  that  the 
Cincinnati  Standard  had  opposed  the  Convention,  and 
thus  led  the  friends  of  the  American  Society  to  absent 
themselves,  upon  the  supposition  that  its  conclusions 
would  not  be  regarded,  by  the  friends  of  the  Board ; 
that  the  delegates  came,  under  instructions  as  to  their 
votes,  and  were  therefore  without  discretion  ;  and  that 
the  Board  of  Missions  itself  had  violated  a  tacit  expecta- 
tion of  the  Assembly,  that  they  would  not  interfere  ; 
by  republishing  its  re])ly  to  the  Cincinnati  Presbytery ; 
and  by  announcing  to  the  public  that  its  views  remained 

the  same. 

But  especial  emphasis  was  laid  upon  "the  Secret 
Circular,  issued  by  a  certain  Central  Committee  in 
Philadelphia."     "  To  that  circular  we  are  disposed  to 


388  HISTOPwY   OF   THE   NEW  SCHOOL. 

trace  the  singularly  full  representation  of  the  Synod  of 
Pittsburgh.  It  is^  at  least,  a  striking  fact  that  the  Con- 
vention at  Pittsburgh,  which  resulted  in  so  full  a  repre- 
sentation to  the  Convention  at  Cincinnati,  was  called 
by  the  committee  of  safety  for  that  Synod,  named  in  the 
circular;  with  the  exception  of  one  whose  name  was 
placed  on  that  committee  without  his  sanction.^'* 

The  Central  Committee,  here  alluded  to,  was  ap- 
pointed by  the  minority  of  the  Assembly  of  1831.  It 
consisted  of  the  Kev.  Dr.  Green,  Rev.  Messrs.  Potts, 
Engles,  and  Winchester,  and  Elders  Matthew  L. 
Bevan,  Solomon  Allen,  and  Furman  Leaming.  At  the 
same  time,  committees  of  correspondence  were  appointed 
in  each  Synod.  That  of  the  Synod  of  Pittsburgh, 
referred  to  in  the  Report,  consisted  of  Rev.  Messrs.  E. 
P.  Swift,  T.  D.  Baird,  A.  D.  Campbell,  Wm.  Wylie,  C. 
C.  Beattie,  and  John  W.  Nevin. 

The  "  Secret  Circular^^  was  a  communication,  under 
date  of  July  21,  1831,  issued  by  the  Central  Committee, 
and  sent  to  the  Sy nodical  committees,  and  to  others 
throughout  the  Church,  who  were  supposed  to  sympa- 
thize with  the  objects.  After  stating  the  nature  of  the 
crisis,  resulting  from  the  organization  and  action  of  the 
Assembly  of  1831,  the  circular  proposed  and  answered 
the  question,  "  What  ought  to  be  done  ?'^  Under  the 
solemn  conviction  that  "  this  is  the  last  year  in  which 
our  Church  will  remain  without  essential  changes, 
unless  her  children  shall  be  roused  to  a  sense  of  their 
danger,  and  call  into  vigorous  action  their  united  ener- 
gies, in  her  defence,"  the  following  measures  were 
recommended : — 

*  Report  of  the  Minority,  pp.  5,  6. 


THE   WESTERN   MISSIONARY   QUESTION.  389 

"  First  of  all,  look  to  God  for  his  guidance  and  bless- 
ing  Let  us  also  both  pray  and  labor  to  promote 

vital  piety 

"  2.  Let  all  lawful  measures  be  used  to  rouse  our 
brethren,  both  clergy  and  laity,  to  a  just  sense  of  their 
situation  and  their  duty.  AYith  this  view,  we  advise 
that  you  correspond  with  Presbyteries,  as  stated  in  the 
beginning  of  this  communication.  Make,  also,  a  free, 
but  discreet  use  of  the  press ;  and  encourage  liberally, 
and  circulate  as  widely  as  possible  those  publications 
which  maintain  the  real  doctrines  of  our  Church,  and 
advocate  the  support  of  her  institutions 

"  3.  Our  Board  of  Education  and  Board  of  Missions, 
must  both  receive  a  liberal  patronage  and  a  decided 
suj^port.  This  is  essential ; — without  this,  we  are  un- 
done. The  voluntary  associations  that  seek  to  engross 
the  patronage  of  our  Church,  and  have  already  engrossed 
a  large  part  of  it,  have  taken  the  start  of  us,  in  the 
all-important  concerns  of  education  and  of  missions. 
They  now  labor  to  get  the  whole  of  these  into  their 
own  hands  ;  well  knowing  that,  if  this  be  effected,  they 
will,  infallibly,  in  a  very  short  time,  govern  the  Church; 
for  education  furnishes  missionaries,  and  missionaries 
become  pastors,  and  pastors,  with  their  ruling  elders, 
form  Church  Sessions,  Presbyteries,  Synods,  and  Gene- 
ral Assemblies 

"  Finally, — The  several  judicatories  of  our  Church 
must  be  carefully  and  punctually  attended,  by  every 
orthodox  man,  whose  right  and  duty  it  is  to  hold  a  seat 

in  them Nor  was  it  ever  so  important  in  our 

Church,  as  at  the  present  time,  that  orthodox  Presby- 
teries should  choose  wise  men,  a*nd  firm  men,  to  repre- 
ss « 


390  HISTOEY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

sent  them  in  the  Assembly.  But  it  is  most  important 
that  every  man  elected,  whether  minister  or  elder, 
unless  prevented  by  invincible  hindrances  of  a  provi- 
dential kind,  should  attend  that  body,  at  the  next  meet- 
ing. For  want  of  that,  at  our  last  meeting,  we  were 
left  in  a  minority.^'  .... 

Such  was  the  v/hole  substance  of  the  paper,  stigma- 
tized in  the  ^^  Report,"  as  a  "  Secret  Circular,"  although 
it  conveyed  no  injunction  of  secresy,  and  proposed  no 
deeds  of  darkness.  The  ISTew  School  party  strove,  by 
every  means,  to  render  it  odious,  with  a  zeal  propor- 
tioned to  the  well-grounded  apprehensions  they  felt  of 
its  influence  in  arousing  and  organizing  the  Old  School 
party. 

A  reply  to  the  Report,  and  a  review  of  the  Conven- 
tion was  publislied  in  the  Presbyterian,  by  the  Rev. 
Thomas  D.  Baird,  in  a  series  of  articles,  signed  by  "  A 
member  of  the  Convention."  The  developments  and 
decisions  of  that  Convention,  terminated  the  active 
Home  Missionary  controversy.  Thenceforward,  the 
efforts  of  the  American  Society  were  directed,  rather,  to 
the  silent  acquisition  of  influence,  by  multiplying  its 
missionaries ;  than,  to  open  assaults  upon  the  Board,  or 
formal  attempts  to  accomplish  its  amalgamation,  by  the 
authority  of  the  x4.ssembly. 

One  of  the  suggestions  made  in  the  Philadelphia 
Circular  was  that  a  free  use  of  the  press  should  be  made 
by  the  Old  School.  Heretofore,  the  papers  of  the 
Church  had  all  been  under  the  control  of  the  New 
School,  or  of  the  Moderates.  But,  on  the  16th  of 
March,  1831,  the  first  number  of  the  Presbyterian  was 
issued, — a  paper,  the  principles   of   which  were   sufii- 


THE   WESTERN   MISSIONARY   QUESTION.  391 

ciently  indicated  by  the  statement  at  its  head,  that  its 
profits  would  be  divided  between  the  Boards  of  Mis- 
sions and  Education.  During  the  same  season  the 
Cincinnati  Standard  commenced  its  issues ;  and  the 
next  spring,  the  Rev.  Thomas  D.  Baird  succeeded  to 
the  editorial  chair  of  the  Pittsburgh  Christian  Herald. 
Mr.  Baird  and  the  Rev.  Dr.  Samuel  Ralston,  the  Philo 
Evangelicus  of  the  Herald,  had  early  covenanted  with 
each  other  to  devote  their  pens  to  the  maintenance  of 
the  doctrinal  purity  and  the  order  of  the'  Church;  a 
covenant  which  both  of  them  fully  redeemed  ;  and  Mr. 
Baird  was  now,  by  the  friends  of  sound  order,  selected 
to  preside  over  the  press,  at  the  most  critical  position 
in  the  entire  field ;  requiring,  more  perhaps  than  any 
other,  the  utmost  prudence,  sound  judgment,  and  firm- 
ness. For,  whilst  the  Scotch-Irish  Presbyterians  of 
that  Synod  were  of  the  most  determined  loyalty  to  the 
doctrines  and  institutions  of  the  Church,  the  positions 
of  distinction  and  controlling  influence  in  the  Synod 
were,  with  a  very  fcNV  exceptions,  held  by  men  whose 
sympathies  were  altogether  against  the  decisive  course 
of  policy,  by  wliich,  under  the  smile  of  the  gracious 
Head  of  the  Church,  she  was  finally  rescued  from  the 
dangers  which  surrounded  her. 


CHAPTER  XXV. 

ELECTIVE   AFFINITY   CHUECH   COURTS. 

Memorial  to  the  Assembly  to  divide  the  Philadelphia  Presbytery — 
Petitions  to  the  Synod  refused — Complaint  to  the  Assembly^-Elec- 
tive  Affinity  Presbytery  erected — The  Synod  refuses  to  recognize 
it — Complaint  to  the  Assembly — Dr.  Beman's  management — Com- 
mittee of  compromise — Discussion  in  Synod — It  reunites  the  two 
Presbyteries,  and  subdivides  them  geographically — Complaint  to 
the  Assembly — It  is  sustained — Synod  of  Delaware  erected — Third 
Presbytery  of  New  York — Presbytery  of  Cincinnati. 

The  Assembly  of  1831  had  given  its  opinion  that 
the  Presbytery  of  Philadelphia  should  be  so  divided  as 
to  promote  tTie  peace  of  its  ministers  and  churches. 
After  the  final  disposal  of  Barnes'  case,  a  memorial  was 
presentedj  in  which  the  Assembly  was  requested  to 
divide  that  Presbytery,  at  once,  and  to  erect  the  New 
School  members  into  a  second  Presbytery.  Hereupon, 
a  discussion  arose,  as  to  the  power  of  the  Assembly 
in  the  premises.  Mr.  R.  J.  Breckinridge  argued,  at 
length,  against  its  constitutional  right  to  touch  the  pro- 
position. After  some  discussion,  the  previous  question 
was  called  for,  and  decided  in  the  negative,  by  a  vote 
of  117,  to  64;  and  thus,  under  the  rule,  the  subject 
was  indefinitely  postponed. 

At  the  next  meeting  of  the  Synod  of  Philadelphia, 
two  petitions  came  before  it,  on  this  subject, — one  from 

392 


ELECTIVE    AFFIXITY   CHURCH    COURTS.  393 

the  Presbytery  of  Philadelphia,  and  the  other  from  the 
New  School  minority  of  that  Presbytery.  The  former 
proposed  a  geographical  division  of  the  Presbytery, 
making  Market  street  the  line.  The  latter  requested 
the  Synod  to  set  off  certain  enumerated  ministers  and 
churches,  whose  sentiments  were  sujjposed  to  Jiarmonize 
with  the  New  School,  to  constitute  a  second  Presbytery, 
without  defined  geographical  boundaries. 

In  the  Synod,  it  a})peared  that  the  project  of  division, 
submitted  by  the  minority,  was  framed  without  con- 
sulting the  parties  concerned  ;  and  some  of  the  minis- 
ters, enumerated  in  the  petition,  earnestly  protested 
against  being  associated  with  the  new  organization. 

The  Synod,  after  full  deliberation,  declined  to  comply 
with  either  petition,  declaring  that  whilst  it  regarded 
with  respect  the  recommendation  of  the  Assembly,  it 
considered  any  division  of  the  Presbytery  to  be  in  every 
point  of  view,  inexpedient.  Dr.  Ely  and  others  gave 
notice  that  they  would  comj^lain  to  the  Assembly,  and 
look  to  it,  to  grant  the  desired  division. 

They  accordingly  brought  before  the  Assembly,  in 
1832,  a  complaint  and  petition.  These  j^apers,  how- 
ever, were  incongruous  to  each  other.  The  one  com- 
plained of  the  Syiiod  for  not  erecting  a  Presbytery,  to 
consist  of  twenty-three  enumerated  ministers,  and  cer- 
tain specified  churches. 

The  petition  sought  the  erection  of  a  Presbytery  of 
thirteen  enumerated  ministers  and  as  many  specified 
churches,  differing  from  the  former  list.  In  the  Assem- 
blv,  various  causes  combined  to  secure  success  to  the 
complaint  and  petition.  Some  members  favored  them, 
from  sympathy  with  the  theological  sentiments  which 


o 


94  *    HISTORY   OF    THE    NEW   SCHOOL. 


sought  harbor  in  the  new  organization.  Some  were 
actuated  by  a  hope  that,  by  the  separation  of  the  oppos- 
ing parties,  peace  might  be  restored  to  the  Xl^hurch. 
Others  regarded  the  recommendation  of  the  Assembly 
of  1831,  in  favor  of  a  division,  as  a  compromise  mea- 
sure, by  which  they  were  bound.  After  a  full  hearing 
of  the  parties  and  a  long  discussion,  the  complaint  was 
sustained ;  but  without  censure  upon  the  Synod.  Mr. 
Kobert  J.  Breckinridge,  now  moved  that,  as  the  peti- 
tion before  the  Assembly  was  different  from  that  which 
had  been  rejected  by  the  Synod,  the  decision  upon  the 
complaint  closed  the  judicial  case,  and  the  Synod  should, 
therefore  be  readmitted  to  sit  and  vote  upon  the  peti- 
tion. This  motion  was  renewed,  at  different  stages  of 
the  business,  ■  but  always  rejected.  In  the  result,  the 
Assembly  erected  a  Presbytery  to  be  known  as  the 
Second  Presbytery  of  Philadelphia,  to  consist  of  four- 
teen enumerated  ministers  and  as  many  churches,  selected 
with  a  view  to  their  doctrinal  affinities.  The  body  thus 
created  neither  corresponded  with  that  contemplated  in 
the  rejected  application  to  the  Synod,  nor  with  that 
described  in  the  petition  to  the  Assembly. 

"When  the  Synod  of  Philadelphia  met,  in  the  follow- 
ins:  October,  communications  were  received  from  the 
Synods  of  Cincinnati  and  Pittsburgh,  enclosing  papers 
adopted  by  those  bodies,  remonstrating  to  the  Assem- 
bly against  the  creation  of  the  "  Elective  x4.ffinity  Pres- 
tery.^^*  Sustained  by  such  countenance,  the  Synod 
adopted  a  respectful  but  earnest  remonstrance  to  the 
Assembly.     In  this  paper  it  represented   that  such  a 

*  This  very  apt  designation  originated,  during  the  discussion,  with 
Dr.  Skinner,  who  w^as  an  original  member  of  the  l^ody. 


ELECTIVE   AFFINITY   CHUECH    COUrvTS.  395 

division  as  the  Assembly  had  made  was  inexpedient ; 
as,  if  acted  upon,  generally,  it  would  create  utter  json- 
fusion,  in  consequence  of  co-ordinate  and  hostile  juris- 
diction of  Presbyteries  over  the  same  territory; — and 
unconstitutional,  inasmuch  as  the  Form  of  Government 
expressly  declares,  that  a  Presbytery  consists  of  "  all 
the  ministers  and  one  ruling  elder  from  each  congrega- 
tion within  a  certain  district/'  The  Synod,  further, 
held  the  act  of  the  Assembly  to  be  unconstitutional, 
because,  "  while  the  Constitution  prescribes  that  the 
General  Assembly  has  the  exclusive  power  '  of  erect- 
ing new  Synods,  when  it  may  be  judged  necessary,'  it 
exj^licitly  prescribes  that  Synods  have  the  exclusive 
authority  in  '  erecting  new  Presbyteries,  and  uniting 
and  dividing  those  which  were  before  erected/ ''  In 
view  of  these  considerations  and  of  the  dangers  impend- 
ing over  the  Church,  the  Synod  declined  to  recognize  the 
Presbytery,  and  earnestly  prayed  the  General  Assembly 
to  review  the  matter,  and  redress  the  grievances  which 
it  liad  occasioned. 

Against  this  action,  protest  was  entered,  and  com- 
plaints were  carried  up  to  the  Assembly.  To  secure 
the  desired  results  from  that  body,  the  faculties  of  Dr. 
Beman  were  again  called  into  requisition.  A  printed 
circular  letter  was  secretly  issued,  over  his  signature, 
and  addressed  to  trusted  parties.  After  alluding  to  the 
action  of  the  Synod  in  the  elective  affinity  case,  as.  "si 
])low  aimed  at  the  fundamental  principles  of  Pres byte- 
rial  government,"  and  stating  that  ^'  it  is  time  the  ques- 
tion was  tlccided,  whether  our  Church  is  bound  by  the 
express  provisions  of  the  Constitution  ;  or  whether  an 
inferior  tribunal  has  a  right  to  disannul  the  decisions 


396  "*    HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

of  tlie  highest  court  of  appeals" — this  gentleman,  whose 
place  on  the  roll  of  the  ministry  of  the  Church,  was 
in  contempt  of  the  Constitution,  ^vhich  he  had  never 
adopted,  proceeded  to  ask  his  corresj^ondents, — ^^Will 
you  look  w^ell  to  the  Commissioners  who  attend  the 
next  General  Assembly?  Observe  the  following  par- 
ticulars :  1.  Be  sure  to  elect  your  full  number,  both  lay 
and  clerical.  2.  Let  them  be  peace  and  union  men ; 
men  wdio  will  take  correct  ground,  in  relation  to  those 
movements  which  are  intended  to  excite  jealousies  and 
divisions  in  the  Presbyterian  Church.  3.  Be  sure  and 
have  all  the  commissioners  attend.  4.  Insist  on  their 
being  present,  in  Philadelphia,  at  least  the  day  before 
the  Assembly  opens.  5.  Request  them  to  attend  and 
report  their  names,  at  the  lecture-room  of  Dr.  Skinner's 
church,  in  Arcli  street,  on  Wednesday  evening,  the  15th 
of  May,  at  half-past  7  o'clock. 

"  Affectionately  yours, 

''  Nathan  S.  S.  Beman."* 

Marshaled,  thus,  as  an  Assembly  of  ^^  peace  and 
union"  men,  that  body,  after  the  precedent  of  1831, 
had  recourse  to  a  "  Committee  of  Compromise,"  to 
whom  all  the  papers  in  the  Philadelphia  case  were  re- 
ferred, '^  to  endeavor  to  effect  a  compromise,  if  practica- 
ble, betw^een  the  parties  concerned."  The  Synod  had 
ai5pointed  a  committee  to  represent  it  and  protect  its 
interests,  in  this  case;  consisting  of  the  Rev.  Messrs. 
McCalla,  Hutchinson,  Douglass,  Junkin,  James  and 
William  Latta,  and  James  Williamson.  The  committee 
of  compromise,  instead  of  consulting  these,  the  true  and 
*  Presbyterian,  1833,  pp.  63,  70 


ELECTIVE   AFFINITY   CHUECH   COURTS.  397 

official  representatives  of  the  Synod,  called  a  meeting  of 
such  members  of  that  body  as  happened  to  be  in  Phila- 
delphia. Of  these,  a  majority  belonged  to  the  minority 
of  the  Synod,  and  readily  voted  that  the  remonstrances 
and  other  pa2)ers  should  be  suppressed,  the  complaints 
withdrawn,  and  the  Elective  Affinity  Presbytery  remain 
intact.  The  committee,  thereupon,  reported  to  the  As- 
sembly "  that  they  have  liad  an  interview  with  several 
members  of  the  Second  Presbytery  of  Philadelphia ; 
and,  subsequently,  with  the  Presbytery,  itself,  on  the 
subject  of  their  complaint  against  the  Synod  of  Phila- 
delphia; and  that  they  have  had  an  interview  with 
thirty-one  members  of  the  Synod,  assembled  at  the  re- 
quest of  the  committee ; — that,  after  a  free  conference 
with  both  these  parties,  during  which  the  subject  of 
their  conference  was  treated  with  much  tenderness  and 
Christian  affection,  the  committee  are  enabled  to  recom- 
mend to  the  Assembly  the  following  resolution,  viz. : 

"  Resolved,  that  the  complainants  in  these  cases,  have 
leave  to  Avithdraw  their  complaints,  and  that  the  con- 
sideration of  all  the  other  papers  relating  to  the  Second 
Presbytery  be  indefinitely  postponed.^^ 

"  The  above  report  was  approved,  and  the  resolution 
unanimously  adopted.  The  Assembly  then  united  in 
prayer,  returning  thanks  to  God,  for  his  goodness,  in 
bringing  this  matter  to  such  an  amicable  adjustment." 
It  is  a  painful  feature  in  this  history,  that  the  most 
indefensible  acts  of  outrage  to  the  Constitution  and  to 
the  rights,  therein,  guaranteed  to  parties, — as  in  1831, 
so,  now, — were  followed  by  the  attempt  to  sanctify  them 
with  the  form  of  thanksgiving  and  prayer.  In  the 
present  instance,  the  whole  ground  of  gratulation  was, 
34 


398  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

that  the  Assembly  had  succeeded  In  devising  a  mode  in 
which  to  ignore  the  remonstrances  of  tlie  Synods  of  Cin- 
cinnati, Pittsburgh  and  Philadelphia,  and  in  effect,  to 
sustain  the  complaint  against  tlie  latter  Synod,  without 
allowing  it  the  opportunity  of  one  word  in  its  own 
defence. 

The  committee,  on  behalf  of  the  Synod,  immediately 
sent  in  a  communication  to  the  Assembly,  remonstrating 
against  the  course  pursued.  An  attempt  was  made  to 
induce  them  to  withdraw  the  paper.  But  the  house 
was  informed,  through  the  Moderator,  that  the  commit- 
tee could  not  take  that  responsibility.  Repeated  re- 
quests to  have  it  read  were  refused ;  and  finally,  it  was 
referred  to  the  committee  of  Bills  and  Overtures,  there 
to  be  suppressed.* 

Such  was  the  state  of  the  case  which  came  before  the 
Synod  of  Philadelphia,  at  its  meeting  in  October,  1833. 
At  the  opening  of  the  sessions,  Mr.  Gilbert  moved  that 
the  Presbytery  be  recognized,  and  its  members  enrolled. 
Mr.  Engles  proposed  a  substitute  for  this  motion,  in  the 
form  of  three  resolutions.  The  first  protested  against  the 
constitutionality  of  the  erection  of  that  Presbytery,  yet 
recognized  and  enrolled  it,  as  a  constituent  of  the  Synod. 
The  second  reunited  it  with  the  Presbytery  of  Philadel- 
phia. The  third  divided  the  reunited  Presbytery  by 
the  line  of  Market  street,  the  ministers  and  churches 
south  of  that  line  to  be  known  as  the  Presbytery  of 
Philadelphia,  and  those  north  of  it  to  be  the  Second 
Presbytery  of  Philadelphia. 

Dr.  Green  offered  a  different  paper,  which  asserted 
the  exclusive  right  of  Synods  to  erect  Presbyteries ; — 
*  Mr.  McCalla,  in  the  Presbyterian,  June  12,  1833. 


ELECTIVE   AFFINITY   CHURCH   COURTS.  399 

denounced  the  principle  of  elective  affinity  In  the 
erection  of  church  courts ; — denied  the  constitutional 
existence  of  the  Second  Presbytery;  —  cjeclared  the 
Synod  to  be  "deeply  aggrieved,  and  as  having  been 
treated  with  peculiar  disrespect,"  by  the  Assembly,  in 
its  refusal  "so  much  as  to  hear  the  remonstrance  and 
representations  of  this  Synod ;" — and  proposed  to  recog- 
nize the  members  set  off  into  the  new  Presbytery  by  the 
Assembly,  provided  they  would  now  acknowledge  that 
Presbytery  to  be  a  nullity.  It  also  provided  that  none 
who,  since  its  erection,  had  been  received  by  the  Presby- 
tery, should  now  be  admitted  as  members  of  Synod. 

Dr.  Green's  motion  was  rejected,  by  a  vote  of  twenty- 
two  ayes,  to  forty-three  noes.  !Mr.  Engles'  paper  was 
then  adopted,  by  thirty-nine  to  twenty. 

This  action  of  the  Synod  was  entirely  disregarded  by 
the  Assembly's  Presbytery,  which  continued  Its  meet- 
ings and  business,  as  though  no  such  action  had  taken 
place.  In  due  time,  the  case  again  came  before  the 
Assembly,  by  appeal  and  complaint  of  the  Presbytery. 
These  were  sustained  by  the  Assembly,  which  pro- 
nounced the  act  of  the  Synod,  "so  far  as  it  was  intended 
to  unite  the  Second  Presbytery  with  the  Presbytery  of 
Philadelphia,"  to  be  void  ;  at  the  same  time  that  it 
fully  recognized  the  validity  of  the  Synod's  act,  by 
which  the  reunited  Presbytery  had  been  geographically 
divided  Into  the  First  and  Second  Presbyteries,  only 
recommending  that  the  name  of  the  latter  be  changed. 
It  would  seem  that  the  most  obtuse  comprehension 
must  have  seen  the  utter  disregard  of  thfe  Constitution, 
by  which  this  decision  of  the  Assembly  was  dictated. 
Whatever  ulterioi^  powers  any  one  might  attribute  to 


400  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

the  Assembly,  for  the  erection  of  Presbyteries, — it  must 
be  conceded  that,  once  erected,  they  are  but  Presbyte- 
ries ;  like  all  the  rest  in  their  functions,  powers,  and 
responsibilities.  To  them,  precisely  as  to  others,  must 
the  authority  of  Synods  extend.  To  Synods,  the  Con- 
stitution expressly  attributes  power  over  all  Presbyte- 
ries, without  exception,  "  to  unite  or  divide  those  which 
were  before  erected."  Yet,  here,  the  act  of  Synod,  thus 
expressly  authorized  by  the  Constitution,  is  not  reversed, 
merely ;  but  pronounced  void ;  and  that,  for  no  reason, 
whatever,  that  appears,  except  that  the  Presbytery  was 
created  by  the  Assembly,  and  thus  endowed  with  some 
extraordinary  principle  of  vitality  and  independence  of 
the  Synod.  There  was  certainly  not  another  Presbytery, 
under  the  care  of  that  Synod,  the  dissolution  of  which, 
by  it,  would  have  been  thus  declared  void. 

Having  come  to  this  decision,  the  Assembly,  next, 
proceeded  to  provide  for  the  permanent  security  of  this 
extraordinary  offspring.  It  was  in  the  course  of  the 
discussion  on  the  appeal  of  the- Presbytery,  at  this  time, 
that  Mr.  Patterson  urged  the  necessity  of  its  continued 
existence,  for  the  convenience  of  licensing  and  ordaining 
men  who  could  not  pass  the  strict  examination,  on  the 
doctrines  of  the  Confession,  to  which  thev  would  ordi- 
narily  be  liable.  The  argument  equally  indicated 
the  necessity  of  the  Presbytery  beiDg  placed  under  the 
guardian  wing  of  a  Synod,  which  would  abstain  from 
those  troublesome  scrutinies,  on  such  subjects,  in  which 
the  Synod  of  Philadelphia  was  likely  to  indulge.  The 
Presbytery  of  Wilmington  had  just  been  set  off  by  the 
Synod  of  Philadelj^hia,  from  that  of  New  Castle,  and 
was  composed  of  the  very  sort   of   material    requisite 


ELECTIVE   AFFINITY   CHURCH   COURTS.  401 

for  the  j^urpose.  The  adjacent  Presbytery  of  Lewes 
was  also  a  small  body,  of  very  "  liberal'^  sentiments. 
The  Assembly  therefore  erected  the  Synod  of  Delaware, 
to  be  composed  of  the  Philadelphia  Second  Presbytery, 
Wilmington,  and  Lewes.  Of  these,  the  first  numbered 
twenty-tAvo  ministers;  the  second,  ten;  and  the  third, 
six ;  so  that,  in  no  event,  was  the  Elective  Affinity 
Presbytery  liable  to  any  danger,  from  Synodical  action; 
as  it  constituted  a  majority  of  the  whole  body. 

Thus  were  disorder  and  anarchy  organized,  in  the 
bosom  of  the  Church.  Not  only  were  the  Presbyteries 
constituting  the  Synod  of  Delaware  secure  harbors  for 
unsound  ministers  ; — not  only  did  they  enjoy  and  use 
every  facility  for  multiplying  a  heretical  ministry ; — 
but,  could  the  right  of  examination  of  intrant  ministers, 
having  clean  papers,  be  taken  from  the  Presbyteries,  the 
machinery  now  constructed  was  abundantly  adequate. to 
revolutionize  every  sound  Presbytery  in  the  Church, 
and  fill  it  with  propagandists  of  Pelagianism,  and  of 
new  measure  revivals.  At  the  same  time,  the  Elective 
Affinity  Presbytery,  having  no  territory,  was,  by  that 
very  fact,  left  unlimited  in  its  s^iihere  of  operations.  It 
stood  at  the  door  of  every  church  in  the  two  Synodical 
Presbyteries  of  Philadelphia ;  ready  to  seize  upon  any 
occasion,  to  nourish  disaifcction  in  their  churches,  to 
foster  schism,  and  to  erect  the  disaffiscted  into  new  con- 
gregations, under  its  own  care  and  jurisdiction.  Such 
was  the  sj'stem  constructed  by  the  wisdom  of  Modera- 
tion for  healing  the  disorders  which  had  arisen  out  of  the 
introduction  of  false  doctrine.  Such  were  the  lepfiti- 
mate  results  of  that  false  charity  which  was  willing  to 

purchase  peace  and  unity  at  the  expense  of  purity  'of 
34* 


402  HISTOKY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

doctrine  and  fidelity  in  the  discipline  of  the  Church. 
Strife,  division  and  bitterness  resulted  everywhere,  of 
necessity,  from  the  introduction  into  the  bosom  of  the 
orthodox  churches  and  Presbyteries  of  Philadelphia,  of 
such  a  disturbing  element  as  was  constituted  by  the 
Elective  Affinity  Presbytery. 

Two  distinct  objects  were  avowed  in  the  erection  of 
that  Presbytery.  It  was  designed  as  a  safe  retreat  for 
the  theological  sentiments  of  Mr.  Barnes.  And  it  was 
provided  as  a  means  of  facilitating  the  introduction  into 
the  ministry  of  candidates  whose  doctrines  were  at  vari- 
ance with  the  Confession.  In  a  word, — the  object  to 
which  it  was  designated,  from  the  first,  was  the  corrupt- 
ing of  the  theology  of  the  Church. 

The  system  of  orgauizations  which  was  completed  by 
the  erection  of  the  Synod  of  Delaware,  was  the  first  in 
which  the  avowed  principle  of  selection  was,  hostility 
to  the  doctrines  and  institutions  of  our  Church ;  and  its 
erection,  despite  the  resistance  of  the  Synod  of  Phila- 
delphia, established,  in  the  most  ofFensive  form,  the 
principle,  that  such  hostility  conferred  a  title  to  special 
privileges  and  immunities.  The  existence  of  these 
courts  was,  of  itself,  decisive  of  the  inevitable  division 
of  the  Church.  It  was  a  fact  which  no  sound  Presby- 
terian, in  his  senses,  could  tolerate. 

But  although  this  was  the  most  oifensive  case,  of  or- 
ganization determined  by  doctrinal  and  party  affinity,  it 
was  not  the  only  one,  nor  the  first.  In  1830,  applica- 
tion was  made  to  the  Synod  of  New  York,  by  eight 
members  of  the  Presbytery  of  JSTew  York  to  be  set  off 
into  a  new  Presbytery.  The  request  was  granted,  and 
the  Third  Presbytery  of  New  York  constituted,  consist- 


ELECTIVE   AFFINITY   CHURCH   COURTS.  403 

ing  of  Drs.  Cox,  Peters,  and  others,  selected  with  a 
view  to  congeniality  of  views  and  principles.  This 
organization  soon  became  a  most  active  and  powerful 
instrujnent  for  corrupting  the  Church.  It  was  the 
favorite  agency  for  the  ordination  of  the  young  mis- 
sionaries from  Xew  EngUmd,  with  whom  the  American 
Home  Missionary  Society  was  flooding  the  Presbyteries 
of  the  West ;  and  through  it,  Dr.  Beecher  accomplished 
liis  extraordinary  transit  into  the  Presbyterian  Church, 
in  order  to  qualify  himself  for  the  presidency  of 
Lane. 

AVhilst,  thus,  Philadelphia  and  ]^ew  York,  the  two 
great  centres  of  influence  for  the  Church  in  the 
East,  were  provided  for,  the  queen  city  of  tlie  West, 
the  centre  of  influence  for  that  region,  was  not  disre- 
garded. The  Presbytery  of  Cincinnati  was  not  origi- 
nally formed  on  the  elective  affinity  principle.  But  it 
was  so  skillfully  stocked  by  Dr.  Peters  with  his 
partisans  and  agents,  headed,  at  length,  hy  Dr.  Beecher, 
that,  to  all  practical  purposes  it  was  as  competent  and 
efficient  as  either  of  the  others.  The  resistance  of  Dr. 
Wilson  and  a  few  others  was  an  annoyance,  and  to  some 
extent  embarrassing.  But  their  struggles  were  unavail- 
ing, against  the  overwhelming  Congregational  majority, 
which  rendered  the  body  an  active  agency  for  the 
increase  of  the  party,  at  the  expense  of  the  Constitution 
and  order  of  the  Church. 


CHAPTER    XXVI. 

'  THE   ASSEMBLY   OF   1834. 

Causes  of  New  School  majorities — Spirit  of  the  Assembly  of  1834 — 
Tlie  Western  Conference — Its  memorial — Action  upon  it — Jen- 
nings' resolution  on  ^octrinal  errors,  rejected — Eesolution  of  at- 
tachment to  the  system  of  doctrines — A  protest  rejected. 

For  four  years,  from  1831  to  1834,  inclusive,  the 
majority  in  the  General  Assembly  was  in  the  hands  of 
the  New  School.  Several  causes  co-operated  to  induce 
this  result.  The  ministry  at  the  South  were  removed 
from  contact  with  the  heresies  which  prevailed  on  the 
ISTorthern  border.  They  could  not,  at  first,  believe  that 
the  Church  was  threatened  with  any  serious  innovations 
upon  sound  doctrine.  The  idea  was  assiduously  dis- 
seminated among  them,  that  the  whole  trouble  arose 
out  of  an  unholy  lust  for  power,  among  a  few  persons 
connected  with  the  Boards  in  Philadelphia  and  its 
vicinity.  The  position  taken  by  the  editors  of  the 
Princeton  Review,  tended  to  confirm  this  impression. 
That  periodical  bore,  on  the  title  page,  that  it  was 
^^  edited  by  an  association  of  gentlemen  in  Princeton 
and  its  vicinity."  It  was  regarded  as  the  organ  of  the 
faculty  of  the  seminary.  Of  that  faculty,  the  venerable 
Alexander, — a  native  of  Virginia, — possessed,  more  than 
any  other   man,  the    confidence    of  the    ministry  and 

404 


THE   ASSEMBLY   OF    1834.  405 

churches  of  the  South.  And  when  the  Review,  sup- 
posed to  reflect  his  sentiments,  made  light  of  the  appre- 
hensions, and  condemned  the  policy  of  tlie  Old  School, 
the  effect  was,  to  quiet  apprehension,  and  induce,  rather, 
feelings  of  annoyance  and  displeasure  at  the  agitators, 
who  were  charged  with  destroying  the  peace,  and  en- 
dangering the  unity  of  the  Cliurch,  by  untimely  alarms. 
The  religious  press  of  the  South  was  under  the  control 
of  the  Moderate  party,  disseminated  these  sentiments, 
and  thus  02:)erated  effectually  in  the  same  direction. 

The  removal  of  Dr.  McFarland,  of  Virginia,  to 
Philadelphia,  in  the  fall  of  1835,  as  Secretary  of  the 
Board  of  Education,  involved  results  tending,  greatly, 
to  correct  this  state  of  sentiment.  His  position  gave 
him  an  opportunity  to  form  a  just  estimate  of  the  real 
character  and  designs  of  the  several  parties.  A  man, 
eminent  for  mildness  and  moderation  of  spirit,  and. 
soundness  of  judgment,  he  held  a  high  place  in  the  con- 
fidence of  his  brethren  ;  and  when  he  sounded  the  alarm, 
it  was  felt  that  there  must  be  a  real  and  serious  danger. 
It  was  mainly,  however,  through  the  developments 
of  1834  and  1836, — which  compelled  conviction,  as  to 
the  revolutionary  designs  of  the  New  School, — that  the 
Southern  section  of  the  Church  became  thoroughly 
aroused. 

'Another  efftcient  cause  of  New  School  majorities  in 
the  Assembly,  w^as  inequality  of  representation  in  that 
body.  This  arose,  partly,  from  the  unequal  subdivision 
of  Presbyteries,  in  different  parts  of  the  Church ;  and, 
partly,  from  the  greater  facility  of  access-  to  Philadel- 
phia, enjoyed  by  some  sections.  The  combined  effect  of 
these  causes,  gave  the  North-east  an  advantage  equal  to 


406  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

fifteen  per  cent,  in  the  actual  results,  as  compared  with 
the  South  and  West. 

In  the  Assemblies  of  1832  and  1833,  the  controversy 
had  been  confined,  mainly,  to  the  case  of  the  Elective 
Affinity  Presbytery  ;  which,  as  we  have  seen,  was  ter- 
minated, in  1834,  by  the  erection  of  the  Synod  of  Dela- 
ware. In  the  latter  Assembly,  the  controversy  assumed 
broader  grounds  and  a  more  threatening  aspect.  In 
previous  Assemblies,  the  New  School  party  had  concili- 
ated the  support  of  the  Moderates,  by  a  cautious, 
temporizing  policy.  But,  in  that  of  1834,  a  different 
style  was  adopted.  Confident  of  being  upheld  by  the 
majority  of  the  Church  ;  and  assured  of  the  triumph 
of  all  their  cherished  plans,  the  majority  of  that 
Assembly  displayed  an  impatience  of  oj^position,  and 
an  eagerness  to  seize  at  once  the  prize  that  seemed,  at 
length,  within  their  grasp,  which,  happily,  discovered 
to  the  Church,  in  time,  the  real  spirit  of  the  party,  and 
the  nature  and  importance  of  the  issues  involved.  Un- 
der God,  the  overbearing  domination  of  the  majorities 
of  the  Assemblies  of  1834  and  1836,  were  essential  to 
the  salvation  of  the  Church.  These  drove  many  of  the 
Moderates  from  their  position  of  practical  alliance  with 
the  New  School  party ;  and  changed  the  balance. 

At  an  early  stage,  in  the  proceedings  of  this  Assembly, 
an  overture  was  laid  before  it,  which  was  popularly 
known  as  the  Western  JNIemorial.  The  history  of  this 
joaper  illustrates  the  sources  wlience,  under  God,  the 
deliverance  of  the  Church  arose. 

On  the  31st  of  July,  1833,  a  conference  was  held,  at 
the  house  of  Elder  John  Monfort,  residing  in  INIonroe 
township,    Butler   county,    Ohio.     The   object   of    the 


THE   ASSEMBLY   OF    1834.  407 

meeting  was,  to  confer  respecting  "  the  fearful  decline 
of  sound  doctrine  and  fliithful  discipline  in  the  Church, 
and  the  apprehension  of  its  entire  subversion/'  There 
were  present,  eleven  ^linisters  and  ten  Ruling  Elders. 
The  Rev.  Francis  Monfort,  was  chosen  Moderator,  and 
the  Rev.  Sayrs  Gazlay,  Clerk.  The  original  minutes 
of  the  meeting,  attested  by  Mr.  Gazlay,  are  in  the 
possession  of  the  author. 

Immediately  after  the  organization,  the  conference 
held  a  season  of  devotion,  in  wliicli  ^'  the  brethren,  in 
repeated  addresses  to  the  throne  of  grace,  implored  the 
divine  favor  and  guidance."  A  number  of  letters,  from 
Dr.  J.  L.  Wilson,  Dr.  Ashbel  Green,  and  others,  were 
read.  Messrs.  Thomas  Barr,  James  Coe,  and  David 
Monfort,  Ministers ;  and  C.  H.  Spinning,  S.  Clenden- 
nin,  and  William  LoAvrie,  Elders,  were  then  appointed, 
to  take  into  consideration  the  papers  which  had  been 
read,  and  make  notes  during  the  calling  of  the  roll,  and 
prepare,  from  the  suggestions  thus  obtained,  a  paper 
expressive  of  the  mind  of  the  brethren.  The  roll  was 
then  called,  and  each  member  invited  to  present  his 
views.  After  which,  and  the  appointment  of  the  Rev. 
John  L.  Bclville,  as  an  additional  clerk,  the  conference 
adjourned,  till  the  next  morning. 

In  the  morning,  two  hours  were  spent  in  devotional 
exercises.  The  committee  then  reported,  recommending 
that  a  memorial  be  addressed  to  the  Assembly.  They, 
also,  submitted  a  draft  of  such  a  paper.  It  was  ap- 
proved, "as  to  general  features,''  and  committed  to 
Thomas  Barr,  J.  L.  AVilson,  D.  D.,  and  John  Burt, 
^Ministers ;  and  Henry  B.  Funk,  S.  Clendennin,  and  J. 
Bigger,  Elders ;  with  instructions  to  revise  it,  without 


408  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

adding  any  new  topic,  and  report  it,  at  a  meeting  to 
be  held  during  the  approaching  sessions  of  the  Synod 
of  Cincinnati.     The  conference  then  adjourned. 

At  Synod,  the  conference  approved  the  paper,  as 
finally  submitted,  and  designated  a  committee  to  lay  it 
before  the  Committee  of  Bills  and  Overtures  of  Synod. 
The  latter  committee  refused  to  present  it  to  the  Synod, 
'^  on  account  of  its  length  and  the  amount  of  business 
on  the  docket  of  Synod.'^  A  committee  was,  therefore, 
appointed,  to  have  a  thousand  copies  printed  and  to  fur- 
nish a  copy  to  each  member  of  the  next  Assembly ; 
and  the  conference  adjourned. 

The  paper,  as  it  came  before  the  Assembly  of  1834, 
'^  had  been  adopted,  either  in  whole,  or  in  part,  by 
about  nine  Presbyteries  and  eight  Sessions ;  it  was  also 
signed  by  about  eighteen  ministers  and  ninety-nine 
elders  ;'^ — so  stated  the  committee,  to  whom  it  was  re- 
ferred by  the  Assembly. 

In  this  very  able  document,  the  memorialists,  set 
forth,  in  respectful  and  dignified  language,  but  with 
jilainness  and  decision,  the  various  evils  with  which  the 
Church  was  troubled ;  and  the  unwarrantable  policies 
adopted  by  successive  Assemblici  . 

^^  We  feel  alarmed,"  said  the  memorialists,  ^^  at  the 
evidences  which  press  upon  us,  of  the  prevalence  of 
unsoundness  in  doctrine,  and  laxity  in  discipline ;  and 
we  view  it  as  an  aggravating  consideration,  that  the 
General  Assembly,  the  constitutional  guardian  of  the 
Churches  purity,  even  when  a  knowledge  of  such  evils 
has  been  brought  before  it,  in  an  orderly  manner,  has, 
within  a  few  years  past,  either  directly  or  indirectly, 
refused  to  apply  the  constitutional  remedy.     Appeals, 


THE   ASSEMBLY   OF    1834.  409 

references,  complaints,  and  memorials,  from  individuals, 
Presbyteries,  and  Synods,  have  been  dismissed  on  some 
slight  grounds ;  perhaps,  not  noticed  at  all,  or  merged 
in  some  compromise,  which  aggravated  the  evils  in- 
tended to  be  removed/'  They  then  proceed  to  enume- 
rate "  certain  acts  and  proceedings,  in  our  opinion,  un- 
sound and  unconstitutional  in  themselves ;  some  of 
which  have  been  the  precursors  and  inlets  of  other  evils/' 
They  point  out  the  Plan  of  Union ;  subscription  to  the 
Confession,  with  reservation  ;  the  ordaining,  in  the  East, 
of  candidates  designed  for  the  AVestern  field  ;  the  en- 
couragement given  to  voluntary  societies ;  the  favor 
shown  to  Mr.  Barnes,  by  the  Assembly  of  1831 ;  and 
"  the  compromising  plan,  brought  into  signal  operation 
in  1831,  in  the  case  of  Mr.  Barnes,  and  on  the  question 
of  the  election  of  the  Board  of  Missions,  for  that  year. 
In  both  cases,  this  plan  was  evidently  resorted  to,  in 
order  to  avoid  the  direct  and  decided  course,  which 
would  have  been  agreeable  to  the  spirit  of  pure  Pres- 
byterianism." 

The  memorialists  then  remonstrate  and  testify  against 
nine  specified  doctrinal  errors,  which  they  attribute  to 
the  writings  of  Messrs.  Dufiield,  Beman,  Beecher  and 
Barnes ;  and  request  the  Assembly  to  exert  all  its  pow- 
ers for  the  suppression  of  them.  They  urge  the  redress 
of  these  various  grievances,  by  the  absolute  repeal  of 
the  Plan  of  Union,  and  of  any  special  arrangements 
with  the  Congregational  churches ;  by  using  decided 
measures  to  restrain  such  Presbyteries  as  are  perverting 
their  opportunities  to  the  propagation  of  error ;  and  by 
employing  the  proper  means  to  suppress  erroneous  doc- 
trines in  the  Church.     They  ^^  insist  upon  it,  as  a  matter 

35 


410  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

of  constitutional  right  to  your  memorialists, — as  well 
as,  of  obligation,  on  the  part  of  your  reverend  body, 
and  of  duty  to  the  whole  Church, — that  the  Assembly 
express  an  unequivocal  opinion,  upon  the  following 
points,  concerning  which  conflicting  sentiments  exist ; 
creating  difficulties,  perplexities,  and  tendencies  to 
division/' 

The  points  here  propounded  were,  as  to  the  right  of 
Presbyteries  to  examine  intrant  ministers,  coming  with 
clean  papers ;  the  right  to  examine  and  censure  hereti- 
cal publications,  irrespective  of  proceedings  against  the 
authors ;  and  the  question  of  adopting  the  Confession 
with  mental  reservations. 

The  memorial  closed  with  a  request  for  the  repeal  of 
the  act  erecting  the  elective  affinity  Presbytery  of 
Philadelphia.* 

It  became,  at  once,  a  matter  of  the  first  importance  to 
the  party  majority,  in  the  Assembly,  to  break,  as  much 
as  possible,  the  force  of  a  document,  so  ably  written ; 
so  respectful,  yet  earnest,  in  its  style ;  and  so  Aveighty 
in  the  matters  which  it  presented.  When  reported, 
therefore,  by  the  Committee  of  Bills  and  Overtures,  it 
was  put  upon  the  docket,  without  a  hearing.  It  there 
remained,  until  the  ninth  day  of  the  sessions.  It  was 
then,  referred  to  a  special  committee.  The  committee, 
after  three  days,  made  a  report,  consisting  of  a  series 
of  resolutions.  The  first  of  these  illustrates  the  arbi- 
trary and  intolerant  spirit  which  prevailed  in  the  ma- 
jority. "  Resolved,  That  this  Assembly  cannot  sanction 
the  censure  contained  in  the  memorial,  against  the  pro- 
ceedings and  measures  of  former  General  Assemblies." 
*  See  the  Memorial,  in  the  Digest,  p.  670. 


THE   ASSEMBLY   OF    1834.  411 

The  report  refused  to  abrogate  the  Plan  of  Union ; 
referred  the  memorialists  to  previous  action  of  the  same 
Assembly,  Avhich  advised  against  the  ordination,  in  the 
East,  of  candidates  destined  for  the  West;  and  stated 
that  the  duty  of  guarding  the  doctrinal  purity  of  the 
ministry  belonged  to  tlie  Presbyteries.  On  the  subject 
of  missions,  it  denied  the  Assembly  to  have  any  right 
to  establish  an  exclusive  system ;  but,  whilst  leaving 
the  inferior  judicatories  to  their  own  discretion,  recom- 
mended the  Board  of  Missions  "  to  their  willing  co- 
operation." 

On  the  subject  of  doctrinal  errors,  the  report,  bore 
'^  solemn  testimony  against  publishing  to  the  world, 
ministers  in  good  and  regular  standing,  as  heretical  or 
dangerous,  without  having  been  constitutionally  tried 
and  condemned." 

AVith  respect  to  the  examination  of  intrant  ministers, 
it,  at  first,  stated,  that  ^^  The  Assembly  do  not  deny  the 
right  of  any  Presbytery,  when  it  is  deemed  proper  to 
do  so,  to  examine  into  the  qualifications  of  persons,  ap- 
plying for  membership ;"  yet  urged  that  a  due  regard 
to  the  order  of  the  Church  and  bonds  of  brotherhood, 
required  their  reception  upon  the  faith  of  "  constitu- 
tional testimonials,"  unless  these  have  been  forfeited, 
after  being  received.  The  first  clause  was  stricken  out, 
by  the  Assembly,  before  adopting  the  paper. 

The  report  condemned  the  passing  of  censures  upon 
heretical  books,  except  in  proceedings  against  the  au- 
thors. It  declared  that  the  adoption  of  the  Confession 
by  ministers,  should  be  accepted,  as  in  good  faith,  unless 
there  was  evidence  to  the  contrary.  And,  in  fine,  the 
inferior  courts  were  urged,  '^  in   the  spirit   of  charity 


412  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

and  forbearance^  to  adjust  and  settle,  as  far  as  practi- 
cable, all  their  matters  of  grievance  and  disquietude; 
without  bringing  them  before  the  General  Assembly.'^* 

The  writing  of  this  report  was  attributed  to  Dr. 
Beman,  who  was  present,  although  not  a  member  of 
the  Assembly.  It  was  not  until  after  the  reading  of 
its  hostile  conclusions,  that  the  Assembly,  at  length, 
consented  to  hear  the  memorial,  itself.  During  the 
reading,  members  gave  expression  to  their  contempt 
and  hostility,  by  leaving  the  house,  and  in  other  un- 
equivocal ways. 

The  report  submitted  by  the  committee  was  urged  as 
a  moderate  and  conciliatory  paper !  The  time  of  the 
Assembly  was  too  far  past  to  admit  of  anything  more 
than  a  very  brief  discussion.  The  vote  was  taken, 
upon  the  resolutions  reported,  and  they  were  adopted. 
A  protest  against  this  action  was  submitted.  It  was 
admitted  to  record,  and  a  committee  appointed  to  pre- 
pare a  reply.  The  committee,  however,  reported  it  to 
be  inexpedient  to  assign  any  further  reasons  for  the 
Assembly's  action ;  as  its  course  had  been  fully  vindi- 
cated in  the  debate ! 

Immediately  after  the  adoption  of  the  report  upon 
the  memorial,  the  Rev.  Samuel  C.  Jennings,  of  the  Pres- 
bytery of  the  Ohio,  offered  the  following  resolution  : — 

"  Resolved,  That  this  Assembly,  in  accordance  with  a 
previous  resolution,  which  allows  this  body  to  condemn 
error  in  the  abstract ;  and  in  accordance  with  our  Form 
of  Government,  which  gives  the  General  i^ssembly  the 
privilege  of  warning  and  bearing  testimony  against 
errors  in  doctrine ;  does,  hereby,  bear  solemn  testimony 
*  See  the  Report,  in  the  Digest,  p.  679. 


THE  ASSEMBLY   OF   1834.  413 

against  the  following  errors;    whether  such  errors  be 
held  in,  or,  out  of,  the  Presbyterian  Church,  viz. : — 

"  That  Adam  was  not  the  covenant  head  or  federal 
representative  of  his  posterity. — That  we  have  nothing 
to  do  with  the  first  sin  of  Adam. — That  it  is  not  im- 
puted to  his  posterity. — That  infants  have  no  moral 
character. — That  all  sin  consists  in  voluntary  acts  or 
exercises. — That  man,  in  his  fallen  state,  is  possessed 
of  entire  ability  to  do  whatever  God  requires  him  to 
do,  independently  of  any  new  power  or  ability,  im- 
parted to  him,  by  the  gracious  operations  of  the  Holy 
Spirit. — That  regeneration  is  the  act  of  the  sinner. — 
That  Christ  did  not  become  the  legal  substitute  and 
surety  of  sinners. — That  the  atonement,  of  Christ  was 
not  strictly  vicarious. — That  the  atonement  is  made  as 
much  for  the  non-elect,  as  for  the  elect." 

This  list  of  errors  was  n  transcript  of  those  enume- 
rated in  the  memorial ;  with  two  or  three  verbal  alter- 
ations. Immediately,  the  resolution  was  indefinitely 
postponed.  On  the  question  of  postponement,  the  yeas 
and  nays  were  called  for,  by  the  minority,  for  the  de- 
clared purpose  of  bringing  the  paper  into  the  record. 
This  call,  was  withdrawn,  upon  the  expressed  under- 
standing that  a  protest  would  be  admitted.  The  As- 
sembly then  adopted  the  following  resolution  : 

^'  Resolved y  That  this  Assembly  cherish  an  unabated 
attachment  to  the  system  of  doctrines  contained  in  the 
standards  of  their  faith  ;  and  would  guard,  with  vigi- 
lance, against  any  departures  from  it ;  and  they  enjoin 
the  careful  study  of  it  upon  all  the  members  of  the 
Presbyterian  Church,  and  their  firm  support  by  all 
scriptural  and  constitutional  methods." 
35* 


414  HISTOEY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

The  key  to  this  resolution  must  be  sought  in  the 
word,  ^^  system/'  that  word  of  such  convenient  flexi- 
bility. The  Old  School  members  refused  to  concur  in 
this  action;  as,  in  view  of  the  facts  which  had  just 
occurred,  they  could  only  regard  it  as  a  mockery ; — an 
opinion  which  subsequent  proceedings  confirmed. 

In  immediate  connection  with  this,  the  Assembly 
adopted  two  other  resolutions.  The  first  condemned 
the  publishing  abroad  of  difficulties  and  contentions  of 
local  origin.  The  second,  naively  declared,  that,  "  ex- 
cept in  very  extraordinary  cases,  this  Assembly  is  of  the 
opinion  that  Presbyteries  ought  to  be  formed  with  geo- 
graphical limits."  It  was  by  such  empty  words  as 
these,  that  the  Moderates,  or  Peace  men,  were  held  in 
subordination  by  the  party. 

The  minority  subsequently  brought  in  their  protest. 
After  reciting  Mr.  Jennings'  resolution,  they  said, — 

"  We  protest  against  the  refusal  to  consider  and  act 
definitely  upon  the  above  resolution,  1.  Because  the 
errors  alluded  to  are  contrary  to  the  Scriptures  and  to 
our  Confession  of  Faith,  and  are  of  a  very  pernicious 
tendency.  2.  Because  the  Assembly  was  informed  that 
such  errors,  to  a  great  extent,  pervade  our  land,  and  are 
constantly  circulating  through  our  Church,  in  books, 
pamphlets,  and  periodicals.  3.  Because  in  the  refusal 
to  consider,  and  amend,  if  necessary,  and  adopt  the 
above  resolution,  this  Assembly  has,  in  our  opinion, 
refused  to  discharge  a  solemn  duty  enjoined  by  the 
Confession  of  Faith,  and  loudly  and  imperiously  called 
for  by  the  circumstances  of  the  Church." 

In  violation,  both,  of  the  constitutional  right  of  pro- 
test, and  of  the  express  agreement,  by  which  the   call 


THE   ASSEMBLY   OF    1S34.  415 

for  the  Yeas  and  Nays  had  been  withdrawn,  the  protest 
was  refused  a  j^lace  upon  the  record.  A  motion  was 
then  made  to  record  the  Yeas  and  Nays,  on  this  ques- 
tion ;  the  effect  of  which  would  have  been  to  bring  the 
paper  into  the  record.  This  motion,  Dr.  John  Mc- 
Dowell, acting  as  temporary  Moderator,  pronounced  out 
of  order.  An  appeal  was  taken ;  but  the  decision  was 
sustained  by  the  house,  which  thus  excluded  from  the 
record  every  line  of  this  transaction. 


CHAPTER    XXVII. 

THE   ACT   AND   TESTIMONY. 

A  conference  of  the  Old  School — The  crisis — Miller's  Letters  to  Pres- 
byterians— Organization  and  action  of  the  conference — Committee 
to  draft  an  Act  and  Testimony — Their  report — Doctrinal  errors 
specified — Remedies  proposed — The  signers  covenant  with  each 
other — Publication  of  the  Act  and  Testimony — Its  reception,  by 
the  Kew  School, — by  the  Moderates — Opposition  of  the  Princeton 
Review — Dr.  Wilson's  "Moderates  and  Ultra  Partisans" — Effect 
of  the  discussion. 

Whilst  the  Assembly  of  1834  Avas  in  session,  a 
meeting  was  called,  of  the  Old  School  members,  and 
others,  who  sympathized  with  their  views,  "  for  the 
purpose  of  deliberating  on  the  best  method  of  promot- 
ing the  interests  of  the  Church,  in  the  present  crisis." 
For  four  years,  the  power  of  the  Assembly  had  been  in 
the  hands  of  a  revolutionary  party, — a  party  thoroughly 
organized  and  disciplined, — managed  with  consummate 
skill,  and  guided  with  the  farthest  forecast,  and  a  concen- 
tration and  persistence  of  purpose,  wdiich  nothing  could 
divert  from  its  chosen  and  cherished  ol)ject.  The  design 
was,  so  to  liberalize  the  Church,  as  to  render  her  com- 
prehensive of  all  grades  of  theological  opinions,  nomi- 
nally evangelical ;  and  a  common  receptacle,  for  the 
ingathering  of  an  indefinite  number  of  evangelical 
denominations,  into  one,  grand,  undiscriminating  fold. 
The  extent  of  the  resources  engaged,  and  the  complete- 
416 


THE   ACT   AND   TESTIMONY.  417 

ness  and  efficiency  of  the  anxiliary  machinery,  we  have 
seen.  The  ranks  of  tlic  party  were  swollen,  by  all, 
with  rare  exceptions,  whom  the  efficient  and  systematic 
operations  of  thirty  years  had  drawn  into  the  Presby- 
terian Cliurch,  from  New  England, — by  those  who  had 
become  infected  with  the  contagion  of  New  England 
theology,  in  any  of  its  many  phases ;  or,  who  had  im- 
bibed any  form  of  lax  principles  on  church  government 
and  discipline;  by  that  large  class  who,  themselves,  knew 
and  believed,  or,  rather,  did  not  disbelieve,  the  truth, 
as  to  the  doctrines  of  grace;  but  so  little  appreciated 
its  value,  that  they  did  not  consider  it  worth  contending 
for,  and  preferred,  therefore,  a  supine  and  shameful 
alliance  with  its  enemies,  rather  than  to  be  at  the  trouble 
of  sharing  in  the  toilsome  and  self-denying  office  of  its 
defenders ;  and  by  many  who  believed  and  loved  the 
truth ;  but,  through  a  mistaken  charity,  could  not  be 
persuaded  that  evil  devices  were  formed, — that  the 
departures  from  the  faith  were  really  many  and  serious, 
and  the  danger  great  and  imminent.  From  this  class, 
mainly,  the  party  of  innovation  derived  moral  power 
and  character.  Without  them,  it  would  have  been 
comparatively  impotent  for  evil.  At  each  advancing 
step,  in  the  progress  of  the  movement,  when  the  bosom 
of  the  Church  throbbed  with  startled  appreliension,  in 
view  of  some  new  and  menacing  development,  and 
^vhen  wise  and  faithful  watchmen  uttered  the  notes  of 
alarm,  and  called  the  Church  to  wakefulness  and 
action, — these  good  and  trusted  men  were  always  at 
hand,  ready  to  sing  ttle  lullaby,  in  the  name  of  brotherly 
kindness,  charity,  and  peace,  and  to  hush  the  Church 
back  to  apathy  and  slumber. 


418  HISTORY    OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

The  plans  of  the  party  were  now  advancing,  fast  and 

surely,  to  completion ;  and,  unless  the  remedy  is  soon 

found  and  applied,  it  will  shortly  be  too  late.     In  the 

'j  writings  of  Pearson  and  Anderson,  Gilbert  and  Duffield, 

('Barnes  and  Beecher,  Beman  and  Cox,  and  others,  heresy 
now  vaunts  itself,  fearless  of  rebuke.  In  the  person  of 
Mr.  Barnes,  the  Assembly  has  not  only,  judicially,  con- 
ferred on  it  impunity,  but,  in  contempt  of  the  Constitu- 
tion, itself,  has  made  provision  for  its  security  and  com- 
fort; thus,  practically  establishing  the  principle,  that 
departure  from  the  doctrines  of  the  Constitution,  entitles 
the  party  to  special  immunities,  and  honor.  In  the 
elective  affinity  Presbyteries  and  Synod,  and  the  judi- 
catories, in  New  York  and  the  West,  built  up  under 
the  operation  of  the  Plan  of  Union,  and  through  the 
agency  of  the  American  Education  and  Home  Mis- 
sionary Societies,  and  sustained  by  them,  the  requisite 
organizations  are  provided,  to  corrupt  the  theology  of 
the  Church,  and  supersede  Its  Constitution.  The  Plan 
of  Union,  instead  of  being  used  as  a  temj^orary  expe- 
dient, Is  treated  as  a  sacred  and  time-honored  covenant 
and  constitution,  paramount  to  the  Constitution  of  the 
Church  Itself,  and  more  venerable  and  binding  every 
day.  And  now,  the  denial  to  the  Presbyteries,  by  the 
Assembly  of  1834,  of  the  right  of  examination  of  can- 
didates for  admittance,  exposes  every  Presbytery  In  the 
land,  helplessly,  to  the  Infusion  of  a  corrupt  theology. 
The  elective  affinity  Presbytery  may  send  Mr.  Barnes; 
that  of  Troy,  Dr.  Beman ;  and  Oneida,  Messrs.  Finney 
and  Burchard ;  with  a  sufficient  number  of  others, 
armed  with  clean  papers,  to  reconstruct  any  selected 
Presbytery.     They  may  come,  with  the  demand  made 


THE   ACT    AND   TESTIMONY.  419 

on  bclialf  of  Mr.  Chambers, — "  We  expect  you  to  re- 
ceive him,  as  one  of  us;"  and  there  is'no  remedy.  It 
was  thus,  Cincinnati  Presbytery  and  Lane  Seminary 
were  lost  and  won. 

And,  the  General  Assembly,  having  pursued  "the 
compromising  plan,"  for  several  years,  to  the  neglect 
and  violation  of  its  own  constitutional  duties,  and  the 
rights  of  those  who  are  under  its  jurisdiction,  and 
appeal  to  its  bar, — it  now  sends  forth  to  the  inferior 
judicatories  its  admonition,  to  settle  their  difficulties 
among  themselves ;  and  not  bring  them ,  up  to  the 
supreme  court; — an  admonition  which,  interpreted  in 
the  light  of  all  the  circumstances,  must  be  understood 
to  indicate  a  wish  on  the  part  of  the  Assembly,  to  abdi- 
cate its  judicial  office,  and  descend  to  the  position  of  an 
advisory  General  Association ;  with  a  like  transforma- 
tion, in  the  inferior  courts. 

Nor  have  the  plans,  formed  of  old,  respecting  the 
Boards,  been  abandoned.  But  all  things  are  tending 
to  the  desired  end ;  and  when  the  proper  time  shall 
come  to  strike  the  blow,  it  will  be  easy  to  elect  to  each 
of  the  Boards,  and  to  the  Directory  of  the  Seminaries, 
such  persons  as  will  take  the  requisite  action.  Already, 
intimations  are  given  of  a  design  to  make  some  changes 
in  Princeton;  and  the  names  of  McAuley, Mason,  Hill- 
yer,  and  Barnes,  among  the  Directors,  give  reason  to 
ponder  the  possibilities  of  the  future. 

In  another  direction,  recent  indications  were  calcu- 
lated to  cause  anxiety.  During  the  preceding  spring, 
in  a  series  of  "  Letters  to  Presbyterians,"  published  in 
the  Presbyterian  newspaper,  the  Rev.  Dr.  Miller  had 
assumed  ground  which  was  presumably  indicative  of 


420  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

the  position  to  be  taken  by  the  Moderate  party.  In 
these  Letters,  the  questions  in  agitation  were  brought 
under  elaborate  review.  The  conclusions,  however, 
which  were  attained,  were  disproportioned  to  the  argu- 
ment, and  altogether  inadequate  to  the  emergency.  As 
to  doctrinal  differences,  the  Professor  declared  his  con- 
viction that  "  nineteen-twentieths  of  the  whole  number 
of  our  ministers  are  sufficiently  near  to  the  Scriptures 
and  to  each  other,  in  respect  to  all  the  essentials  of 
truth,  to  be  comfortably  united  in  Christian  fellowship 
and  co-operation ;"  and  that  the  great  mass  of  the  min- 
istry were  as  united  in  sentiment  as  we're  the  fathers 
of  the  Church,  in  1741.  The  schism  of  that  year  he 
regarded  as  having  been  condemned  by  the  reunion  of 
1758.  He,  therefore,  gave  his  voice,  "not  for  division, 
but  for  peace  and  continued  union ;"  "  for  softening 
asperities,  for  reconciling  differences,  for  putting  away 
all  bitterness,  and  wrath,  and  evil-speaking.^^  He  in- 
sisted that  the  Church,  in  conducting  the  business  of 
missions  and  evangelization,  was  engaged  in  her  ])roper 
and  peculiar  work ;  yet  wished  her  sons  to  sustain  the 
voluntary  societies,  too  ;  and,  whilst  expressing  pleasure 
at  the  formation  of  the  Western  Foreign  Missionary 
Society,  uttered  the  hope  that  the  attempt  would  not  be 
made  to  induce  the  Assembly  to  undertake  the  work. 
He  condemned  and  showed,  very  clearly,  the  evil  and 
danger  of  erecting  church  courts  upon  the  principle 
of  elective  affinity ;  and  yet  declared  that,  had  he  been 
in  the  Assembly,  he  would  probably  have  voted  for 
that  measure.  In  fact,  the  venerable  Professor  was  the  | 
leading  promoter  of  the  "  compromising  policy"  of  the  ^ 
Assembly  of  1831,  by  which  a  judicial  decision,  in  Mr. 


THE   ACT   A:N^D   TESTIMONY.  421 

Barnes'  case  was  evaded ;  and  he  was  chairman  of  the 
committee,  which  recommended  the  erection  of  the  elec- 
tive affinity  Presbytery,  for  the  accommodation  of  that 
gentleman,  and  his  friends. 

As  the  result  of  the  entire  discussion,  the  Professor 
opposed  himself  decisively  to  any  really  effectual  mea- 
sures, and  proposed,  as  the  remedy  for  the  evils  which 
were  harassing  the  Church,  that  the  extremists,  on  the 
one  hand,  should  cease  giving  cause  of  uneasiness  to 
their  brethren ;  and  that  those,  on  the  other,  should  no 
longer  agitate  the  Church,  with  their  apprehensions 
and  alarms! 

Such  was  the  situation  of  the  Church,  and  such  the 
view  of  it  taken  by  some  of  the  most  honored  and  re- 
vered of  her  ministers ;  when  the  conference  was  called, 
in  the  lecture-room  of  the  Seventh  Church,  on  the  even- 
ing of  May  26,  1834.  The  Kev.  Dr.  William  Wylie 
was  called  to  the  chair;  and  the  Pev.  D.  R.  Preston 
appointed  secretary.  After  an  appeal  to  the  throne  of 
grace,  and  a  free  interchange  of  views,  a  committee  of 
six  was  appointed,  to  prepare  a  protest  against  the  action 
which  had  been  taken  that  day,  restoring  the  elective 
affinity  Presbytery.  But  this  was  comparatively  an 
unimportant  matter.  The  great  question  was,  to  find  a 
really  practicable  and  effectual  remedy  for  the  evils 
threatening  the  Church.  Protests  in  abundance  were 
already  on  record ;  and  served  to  acquit  the  consciences 
of  the  signers ;  but  gave  no  relief  to  the  Church.  Pro- 
secution for  heresy,  remonstrances,  memorials,  petitions, 
references,  appeals,  and  complaints, — every  form  of 
ordinary  remedy  had  been  tried,  in  vain.  To  all,  it 
was  evident,  that  unless  some  means  could  be  devised 

36 


422  HISTORY   OF    THE   NEW   SCHOOL.  1 

to  arouse  the  Church,  effectually,  from  tlie  unconscious- 
ness and  stupor,  into  which  she  had  been  so  assiduously 
nursed, — to  convince  her  of  the  magnitude  of  the  peril 
which  impended  ;  and  so  to  draw  the  lines  as  to  con- 
strain those,  who  really  loved  her  and  the  truth,  to 
rally  to  her  aid, — unless  the  honest  and  orthodox  por- 
tion of  the  Peace  party  could  be  dislodged  from  their 
false  position,  and  induced  to  take  a  stand,  either  for 
or  against  her,  all  else  was  in  vain.  Those  who  loved 
the  doctrines  of  her  standards  might  prepare  to  aban- 
don the  Church,  and  seek  an  asylum  in  some  other  fold. 

One  measure  remained,  which  had  been  tried  and 
blessed  in  other  times  of  peril.  To  it  recourse  was  now 
had.  Upon  motion  of  the  Rev.  Dr.  W.  D.  Snodgrass, 
a  committee  of  nine  was  appointed,  to  prepare  an  Act 
and  Testimony,  on  the  crisis.  The  names  on  this  com- 
mittee are  worthy  of  a  place  on  the  page  of  history. 
They  were  the  Rev.  R.  J.  Breckinridge,  Rev.  Drs. 
Green  and  Snodgrass,  and  the  Rev.  Messrs.  John  Gray, 
Alexander  McFarlane,  Samuel  Boyd,  S.  G.  Winchester, 
H.  Campbell,  M.  D.,  and  the  chairman,  the  Rev.  Dr. 
Wm.  Wylie.  By  these  brethren  the  duty  of  drawing 
up  the  paper  was  laid  upon  Mr.  Breckinridge. 

In  preparing  this  document,  Mr.  Breckinridge  con- 
sulted with  the  Rev.  Dr.  Charles  Hodge;  by  whom,  with 
one  exception,  were  dictated  the  statements,  under  the 
head  of  "  Errors'^  of  doctrine.  The  clause  under  the  head 
of  "  Imputation,'^  was  inserted  by  Mr.  Breckinridge,  con- 
trary to  the  mind  of  Dr.  Hodge.  Other  modifications 
were  made,  in  the  original  draft  of  the  paper,  under  the 
mistaken  impression  that  it  would,  thereby,  secure  the 
approval  and  support  of  the  Professor.     As  thus  con- 


^  THE   ACT   AND   TESTIMONY.  423 

strncted^  the  document  was  reported,  at  an  adjourned 
"  meeting  of  the  conference,  held  on  the  evening  of  the 
28th.  It  was,  then,  referred  to  a  new  committee,  for 
revision.  On  the  morning  of  the  30th,  at  six  o^clock, 
this  committee  rejiorted  several  amendments,  which 
were  approved ;  and,  then,  the  paj^er  was,  finally,  adopted 
and  signed. 

The  Act  and  Testimony,  thus  carefully  framed, — 
after  a  suitable  introduction, — proceeded  to  testify 
against  the  various  evasions  employed  in  adopting  the 
Confession ;  against  a  list  of  enumerated  doctrinal 
errors,  taught  in  the  Church  ;  and  against  irregulari- 
ties in  discipline  and  violations  of  order,  which  were 
prevalent.  It  closed  with  recommending  to  the  churches 
certain  measures  of  reform.  As  to  doctrine,  it  bore 
witness  against  the  following,  as  "  a  part  of  the  errors 
held  and  taught,  by  many  persons  in  our  Church.'^ 

"1.  Our  relation  to  Adam. — That  we  have  no 
more  to  do  with  the  first  sin  of  Adam,  than  with  the 
sins  of  any  other  parent. 

"2.  Native  Depravity. — That  there  is  no  such 
thing  as  original  sin ;  that  infants  come  into  the  world, 
as  perfectly  free  from  corruption  of  nature,  as  Adam 
was,  when  he  was  created  ;  that,  by  original  sin,  nothing 
more  is  meant,  than  the  fact  that  all  the  posterity  of 
Adam,  though  born  entirely  free  from  moral  defilement, 
wdll  always  begin  to  sin,  when  they  begin  to  exercise 
moral  agency  ;  and  that  this  fact  is,  somehow,  connected 
with  the  fall  of  Adam. 

"  3.  Imputation. — That  the  doctrine  of  imputed  sin 
and  imputed  righteousness  is  a  novelty,  and  is  nonsense. 

"4.  Ability. — That   the   impenitent   sinner   is,  by 


424  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

nature,  and  independently  of  the  aid  of  the  Holy  Spirit, 
in  full  possession  of  all  the  powers  necessary  to  a  com-J 
pliance   with    the    commands   of  God  ;  and  that,  if  h( 
labored  under  any  kind  of  inability,  natural  or  moral  J 
which  he  could  not  remove  himself,  he  would  be  ex-] 
cusable  for  not  complying  with  God's  will. 

^^5.  Regeneration. — That  man's  regeneration  is  his] 
own  act ;  that  it  consists,  merely,  in  the  change  of  our] 
governing  purpose,  which   change  we  must   ourselves 
produce. 

"6.  Divine  Influence. — That  God  cannot  exert] 
such  an  influence  on  the  minds  of  men  as  shall  make  it] 
certain  that  they  will  choose  and  act  in  a  particular 
manner,  without  destroying  their  moral  agency ;  and 
that,  in  a  moral  system,  God  could  not  prevent  the  ex- 
istence of  sin ;  or,  of  the  present  amount  of  sin  ;  how-j 
ever  much  he  might  desire  it. 

"  7.  Atonement. — That  Christ's  suiferino\s  were  not] 
tridy  vicarious.'' 

The  practical  recommendations,  embraced  in  the  Act 
and  Testimony,  proposed  to  discountenance  the  propa- 
gators of  error ;  to  use  all  lawful  means  to  bring  them 
to  discipline ;  to  labor  to  re-establish  sound  discipline 
and  order ;  and  to  hold  elective  affinity  courts  to  be 
unconstitutional,  and  those  who  voluntarily  belong  to 
them  to  have,  virtually,  departed  from  the  standards  of 
the  Church.  It  advised  that  all  ministers,  elders,  and 
church  courts  give  their  public  adherence  to  the  Act 
and  Testimony ;  and  that  importunate  supplications  be 
addressed  to  the  King  in  Zion,  for  the  restoration  of 
purity  and  peace.  It  also  recommended  that,  on  the 
second  Thursday  of  May,  1835,  one  week  before  the 


THE   ACT   AND    TESTIMONY.  425 

meeting  of  the  General  Assembly,  "a  convention  be 
held  ill  the  city  of  Pittsburgh,  to  be  composed  of  two 
delegates,  a  minister  and  ruling  elder,  from  each  Pres- 
bytery, or  from  tlie  minority  of  any  Presbytery,  who 
may  concur  in  the  sentiments  of  this  Act  and  Testi- 
mony, to  deliberate  and  consult  on  the  present  state  of 
the  Church,  and  to  adoj^t  such  measures,  as  may  be  best 
suited  to  restore  her  prostrated  standards/^ 

The  paper  closed,  with  the  following  earnest  and  de- 
cisive language :  "  And  now,  brethren,  our  whole  heart 
is  laid  open  to  you,  and  to  the  world.  If  the  majority 
of  our  Church  are  against  us,  they  will,  we  suppose,  in 
the  end,  either  see  the  infatuation  of  their  course,  and 
retrace  their  steps,  or  they  will,  at  last,  attempt  to  cut 
us  off.  If  the  former,  w^e  shall  bless  the  God  of  Jacob ; 
if  the  latter,  we  are  ready,  for  the  sake  of  Christ,  and 
in  su])port  of  the  testimony  now  made,  not  only  to  be 
cut  off,  but,  if  need  be,  to  die  also.  If,  on  the  other 
hand,  the  body  be  yet,  in  the  main,  sound,  as  we  would 
fondly  hope,  we  have,  here,  frankly,  openly,  and  can- 
didly, laid  before  our  erring  brethren  the  course  we  are, 
by  the  grace  of  God,  irrevocably  determined  to  pursue. 
It  is  our  steadfast  aim,  to  reform  the  Church ;  or,  to 
testify  against  its  errors  and  defections,  until  testimony 
will  be  no  longer  heard.  And  we  commit  the  issue 
into  the  hands  of  him  who  is  over  all,  God  blessed 
for  ever.     Amen." 

Thus  solemnly  and  in  the  presence  of  God,  did  the 
signers  of  this  ])aper  pledge  themselves  to  each  other,  to 
consent  neither  to  peace  nor  truce  with  the  corrupters 
of  her  doctrines  and  order ;  but  to  strive,  by  every  law- 
ful and  scriptural  means,  for  their  reformation,  or  exclu- 

36  * 


426  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

sion  from  the  Church  ;  until  the  object  thus  announced 
should  be  accomplished,  or  the  witiiesses  themselves 
cast  out  of  the  body.  Solemnly  was  their  purpose  an- 
nounced; and  well  and  faithfully  was  it  fulfilled. 
History  will  cherish  their  names ;  and  the  Church  of 
God,  in  coming  ages,  will  honor  their  memories.  Un- 
der God,  the  testimony  and  resolve  thus  recorded,  and 
the  measures  adopted  in  pursuance  of  this  pledge,  were 
the  means  blessed  to  the  recovery  of  the  Church.  It 
is  evident  to  the  intelligent  and  candid  reviewer  of  the 
history,  now,  that  without  some  such  decisive  action, 
her  reformation  was,  humanly  speaking,  beyond  hope ; 
and  that  had  the  measure  been  delayed,  but  one  or  two 
years  longer,  it  would,  in  all  probability,  have  come  too 
late.  In  fact,  the  futile  prosecutions  of  Messrs.  Duffield, 
the  Beechers,  and  Barnes,  and  the  proceedings  of  the 
Assembly  of  1836,  demonstrated  that,  already, — had 
the  New  School  party  known  how  to  temper  their  tri- 
umph with  moderation, — the  Church  was  in  their  power, 
and  the  day  for  effectual  resistance  to  their  policy  was 
past. 

The  Act  and  Testimony,  as  originally  published,  on 
the  19th  of  June,  1834,  was  signed  by  thirty-seven 
Ministers,  and  twenty-seven  Elders.  It  ultimately 
received  the  signatures  of  about  three  hundred  and 
seventy-four  Ministers,  seventeen  hundred  and  eighty- 
nine  Elders,  and  fourteen  licentiates.  It  Avas  also 
adopted,  either  entirely  or  substantially,  by  five  Synods, 
and  thirty  Presbyteries. 

The  publication  of  this  paper,  after  the  rising  of  the 
Assembly  of  1834,  was  received  with  various  emotions, 
by  the   different  parties,   into   which  the  Church   was 


THE   AOT   AND   TESTIMONY.  427 

divided.      By   those    who    had    been   long    struggling; 
against  growing  corruption  and  defection,  it  was  liailedj| 
as  a  pledge  of  hope.     By  many,  it  was  accepted,  as  anj 
occasion  of  aroused  attention,  and  of  ultimate  conviction,' 
as  to  the  reality  of  the  emergency,  and  the  necessity  of 
active  exertions,  for  the  recovery  of  the  Church.     By\ 
the  New  School  party,  it  was  received  with  expressions! 
of  mingled  derision,  apprehension  and  displeasure.    But 
it  was  among  the  ^Moderate  party,  that  the  decisive  posi-  , 
tion  taken,  in  the  Act   and  Testimony,  produced  the; 
profoundest  impression,  and  elicited  the  strongest  feel-| 
ings,  and  the  most  intense  opposition.     Many  of  these  j' 
made  this  the   occasion  definitively  to  commit   them- 
selves to  the  Xew  School  party.     Others  who  saw  with 
regret,  the  impossibility  of  retaining,  much  longer,  the 
attitude  of  serene  superiority,  which  they  had  sought  to 
maintain ;  who  felt  tliat  they  must  soon  take  a  defini- 
tive position,  on  one  side  or  the  other,  were  excited  to 
express  their  displeasure  at  the  authors  of  this  necessity, 
in  terms  which  did  not,  always,  keep  within  the  bounds 
of  that   dignified   moderation,  which    they,    so    much, 
affected.  ■ 

But  tlie  most  powerful  and  stunning  blows  dealt 
against  the  Act  and  Testimony,  and  its  friends,  came 
from  a  quarter  whence  they  were  least  expected.  Mr. 
Breckinridge  had  so  modified  the  first  draft  of  the 
document  as  to  meet,  as  he  supposed,  the  views  of  Dr. 
Hodge ;  with  the  hope  of  securing  the  sanction  and  co- 
operation of  Princeton.  In  the  end,  it  appeared  that 
there  had  been  a  total  misapprehension,  between  the 
parties,  on  this  subject.  In  the  Princeton  Review,  for 
October,    the    conductors    of   that    periodical,   in    an 


428  HISTORY   OF   THE   KEW  SCHOOL. 

elaborate  article,  planted  themselves  in  determined  op- 
position to  the  Act  and  Testimony,  and  the  measures 
proposed  by  its  advocates. 

/    In    this  article,    the   document  was    condemned,    as 
/being,  not  a  testimony,  but  a  test, — divisive  in  its  tend- 
/  ency, — as  unjustly  charging  the  General  Assembly  with 
I  giving  countenance  to  error   and    disorder, — as  exag- 
gerating the  extent  of  the  evils  .complained  of, — and  as 
''  a  revolutionary  proceeding,"  "an  appeal  from  the  con- 
stitutional   government,"    in    undertaking    to    call   a 
i^  convention  to  deliberate  on  these  questions. 

Replies  to  this  article  were  made  in  the  Presbyterian 
by  Messrs.  Eiigles  and  Breckinridge.  The  Review  for 
January,  1835,  pursued  the  discussion,  in  two  several 
articles.  In  the  first,  the  reviewer,  went  so  far  as  to 
assert  that,  instead  of  the  Assembly  being,  justly, 
chargeable  with  giving  countenance  to  disorders  or  error, 
the  Old  School  men  themselves  were  responsible  for  the 
obnoxious  measures,  by  reason  of  their  clumsy  manage- 
ment. "  We  have  no  doubt,"  said  the  writer,  "  that 
sound,  Old  School  principles  would  have  fared  far 
better,  in  the  General  Assembly, — nay,  they  would 
have  invariably  triumphed,  if  they  had  been  man- 
aged AND  PRESENTED  WITH,  EVEN,  TOLERABLE  DIS- 
CRETION."* The  reviewer,  still  insisted  that  error  and 
defection  did  not  prevail  to  such  an  extent  as  to  justify 
the  representations  of  the  Act  and  Testimony,  or  give 
occasion  for  serious  apprehension.  "  If  a  few  dozen 
men,  whom  we  could  name,  had  either  the  honesty  to 
'  withdraw  from  a  Church,  whose  formularies  they  never 
I  really  believed ;  or,  the  discretion  to  keep  their  specula- 

*  Princeton  Eeview,  1835,  p.  65. 


THE   ACT   AND   TESTIMONY.  429 

tions  to  themselves ;  we  are  fully  persuaderl,  we 
should  have  occasion  to  hear  little  more,  on  this  subject, 
in  the  Presbyterian  Church."* 

In  the  second  article,  the  same  views  were  pursued, 
with  special  reference  to  the  defensive  publications  of 
Breckinridge  and  Engles.  In  closing  his  remarks,  the 
reviewer  pronounced,  the  Act  and  Testimony  ^'  con- 
fessedly a  failure.  It  is  announced  that  its  object 
was  to  unite  all  the  orthodox.  This  it  has  not  done. 
It  has  received  the  sanction  of  but  one  Synod  in  the 
Presbyterian  Church.  It  has  not,  even  as  a  general 
declaration,  been  adopted  by  one-sixth  of  the  ministers 
of  our  communion.  It  has,  therefore,  failed  in  its 
avowed  object.  More  than  this.  By  failing  to  unite,  it 
must,  of  necessity,  divide.  If  a  certain  portion  only 
of  the  sound  part  of  the  Church  adhere  to  this  docu- 
ment, and  its  policy, — of  course,  the  remaining  portion 
is  separated.  Whose  fault  is  this  ?  The  fault  of  those 
who  proposed  and  urged  the  signing  of  a  paper,  as  a 
test  of  orthodoxy,  which  few,  comparatively,  can  con- 
scientiously sign.  It  is  no  longer  a  matter  of  conjecture 
or  opinion ;  but  a  matter  of  fact,  that  the  Act  and  Tes- 
timony has  divided  the  ranks  of  the  Old  School  men. 
It  has  filled  the  mouths  and  hearts  of  their  most  open 
oj^ponents  with  rejoicing.  It  is,  to  them,  the  most 
certain  presage  of  triumph ;  the  most  welcome  of  all 
services.^t 

Happily,  the  reviewer  was  mistaken.     The  Act  and 
Testimony  was  no  failure.    And,  if  the  enemies  of  sound 
doctrine   were    disposed    to    imagine,    in    it,    cause   of 
triumph,  their  exultation  was  of  brief  continuance. 
*  Eeview,  p.  65.  f  Ibid.,  p.  133. 


430  HISTOEY   OF   THE   NEW  SCHOOL. 

To  these  articles,  of  tlie  Repertory,  the  Rev.  Dr. 
Wilson,  of  Cincinnati,  published  a  pamphlet  reply.  A 
remark,  of  the  Review,  that  "  Moderate  men  have 
always  fared  badly  between  ultra  partisans,"  suggested 
the  title  of  his  paper, — "  The  Moderates,  and  the  Ultra 
Partisans."  In  playful  reference  to  the  nominal  incog- 
nito, under  which  the  reviewer  insisted  upon  veiling 
himself  behind  the  "  Association  of  gentlemen  in 
Princeton,"  by  whom  the  Repertory  was  conducted, — 
Dr.  Wilson  suppressed  his  own  name,  and  signed  him- 
self, ^^  A  Gentleman."  "  Hitherto,"  said  he,  "  I  have 
chosen  the  open  field;  but,  now,  I  must  ^take  to  a  tree.' 
Some  departure,  therefore,  from  the  strictest  rules  of 
polite  warfare  may  be  tolerated."  In  a  mingled  strain 
of  pleasantry  and  satire  he  examined  and  replied  to  the 
points  made  against  "  ultra  Old  School  men,"  and  the 
Act  and  Testimony.  With  reference  to  the  assertion 
that  the  cause  of  failure,  before  the  Assembly,  had  been 
the  mismanagement  of  the  Old  School,  themselves,  by 
whom,  according  to  the  reviewer,  no  case  had  been  pre- 
sented fairly  upon'  its  merits,  "  A  Gentleman"  pun- 
gently  and  most  justly  demanded, — "  Why  have  not 
the  Moderates  done  their  duty,  and  showed  the  Old 
School  how  this  thing  can  be  done  ?  Why  have  they 
not  brought  up  fairly  before  the  Assembly,  some  of  the 
^  few  dozen'  heretics  of  their  acquaintance,  unconnected 
with  'peculiar,  personal,  local,  or  exciting  circum- 
stances ;'  so  that  the  Assembly  might  have  given,  at 
least,  one  '  calm  and  dispassionate'  decision  ?" 

Whilst  these  various  discussions  were  going  on,  and  by 
means  of  them,  the  Act  and  Testimony  was  doing,  most 
effectually,  its  expected  work.     And  upon  none  did  it 


THE   ACT   AND   TESTIMONY.  431 

operate  with  more  evident  power  than  upon  a  large  class  ; 
of  persons  who  spurned  the  idea  of  submitting  them-/ 
selves  to  the  bondage  of  its  test;  but  were  impelled,  all 
the  more  earnestly,  to  demonstrate,  otherwise,  that  they 
were  not  behind  any,  in  their  devotion  to  the  faith,  and 
zeal  for  the  order  of  the  Church. 


I- 


■J 


CHAPTER    XXVIII. 

THE   CONVENTION   AND    ASSEMBLY   OF   1S35. 

Organization  of  the  Convention — Proceedings — Memorial  to  the  As- 
sembly— Opening  of  the  Assembly — Committee  on  the  Memorial — 
Its  report ; — on  examination  of  intrant  ministers ; — on  the  censure 
of  books  and  publications  ; — on  elective  affinity — Dr.  Elliott's 
motion — Dr.  Ely's  compromise — Voluntary  societies — The  Plan  of 
Union — Proposition  to  the  Association  of  Connecticut — Doctrinal 
errors  condemned. 

The  Convention,  called  by  the  Act  and  Testimony, 
met  in  the  Second  Presbyterian  Church,  in  Pittsburgh, 
on  the  14th  of  May,  1835,  at  12  o'clock.  It  was  the 
privilege  of  the  author  of  this  history  to  witness  its 
proceedings.  It  was  called  to  order,  by  the  Rev. 
Thomas  D.  Baird.  The  Rev.  John  Witherspoon  was 
appointed  temporary  chairman,  and  the  Rev.  Messrs. 
I.  V.  Brown  and  Thomas  Alexander,  temporary  clerks. 
The  Rev.  Dr.  James  Blythe  was  appointed  to  preach 
before  the  convention. 

In  the  afternoon,  after  sermon  by  Dr.  Blythe,  the 
permanent  organization  was  effected,  by  the  election  of 
the  Rev.  Dr.  Ashbel  Green,  President,  the  Rev.  J. 
AYitherspoon,  Vice  President,  and  the  Rev.  Messrs. 
Janies  Culbertson  and  Ashbel  G.  Fairchild,  Secretaries. 

During  the  sessions,  there  appeared  and  were  enrolled 
as   members,  •  forty-seven   ministers   and   twenty-eight 

432 


THE   CONVE^'TIOX   AND   ASSEMBLY   OF    1835.        433 

elders,  rej^resentiiig  thirty-six  Presbyteries,  and  thirteen 
minorities. 

The  Rev.  Drs.  Blythe,  Magraw,  Montgomery,  and 
Phillips;  with  Elders  Robert  Wray,  M.D.,  of  Pitts- 
burgh, James  Lennox,  Jr.,  of  New  York,  and  Archibald 
George,  of  Baltimore,  were  appointed  a  committee,  to 
prepare  and  report  whatever  business  should  come 
before  the  Convention. 

Friday,  the  second  day  of  the  sessions  was  given, 
wholly,  to  fasting,  humiliation,  and  prayer. 

On  Saturday,  the  Rev.  Messrs.  George  Junkin,  John 
Witherspoon,  and  J.  L.  Wilson,  and  Elders  Boyd, 
Owen,  and  George,  were  appointed  to  prepare  a  respect- 
ful memorial  and  petition,  to  be  addressed  to  the  As- 
sembly, "  with  our  signatures  as  individuals,  together 
with  such  other  ministers  and  elders  as  may  choose  to 
unite  with  us.''  Messrs.  Stuart  and  Steele  and  Elders 
McPherson  and  Ferguson  were  afterward  added  to  this 
committee. 

During  the  subsequent  sessions,  various  subjects  w^ere 
brought  in  by  the  committee  on  business,  discussed, 
and  referred  to  the  committee  on  the  memorial.  This 
committee  made  report  on  Tuesday  afternoon.  After 
full  discussion,  by  paragraph,  and  amendment,  the 
memorial  was  unanimously  adopted,  on  Wednesday 
afternoon.  It  was  signed  by  seventy-two  ministers, 
and  thirty-six  elders.  ]\Iany  more  signatures  could 
have  been  obtained.  But  the  time  was  limited,  and 
the  object  did  not  require  a  display  of  numbers. 

The  memorial  was,  in  its  spirit  and  purport,  identical 
with  the  xlct  and  Testimony.     It  presented  to  the  notice 
of  the  General  Assembly  certain  grievances,  for  which 
37 


434  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

redress  was  sought.  These  were, — the  denial  of  the 
right  of  Presbyteries  to  examine  applicants  for  admis- 
sion ;  and  to  censure  printed  publications,  irrespective 
of  the  authors, — the  erection  of  elective  affinity  courts, 
— the  favor  shown  to  the  American  Home  Missionary 
and  Education  Societies, — the  operation  of  the  Plan  of 
Union, — the  admission  of  Congregational  delegates  to 
the  right  of  deliberation,  on  all  questions  coming 
before  the  Assembly, — and  the  prevalence  of  unsound 
doctrines  in  the  Church.  The  doctrines  enumerated, 
were  essentially  the  same  as  those  presented  in  the 
Western  Memorial,  and  in  the  Act  and  Testimony.  Of 
the  tendency  of  these  errors,  the  memorialists  thus 
testified, — "  Now,  Reverend  Fathers  and  brethren,  we 
humbly  conceive  that  this  is  ^  another  gospel,'  entirely 
and  essentially  different  from  that  laid  down  in  the 
Bible  and  our  Confession  of  Faith.  And  we  do,  most 
solemnly  and  sorrowfully,  believe,  that,  unless  the 
Spirit  of  the  Lord  raise  up  a  standard  against  it,  it  will 
be  followed,  in  our  Church,  as  it  has  been  elsewhere, 
by  the  entire  system  of  Pelagianism,  and  ultimately, 
of  Socinianlsm.  If  the  atonement  is  not,  essentially, 
vicarious  and  penal,  why  demand  a  divine  Redeemer  ? 
If  an  exkihition  is  all  that  is  required,  why  not  hold  up 
Stephen,  or  Peter,  or  Paul,  or  John  Huss,  or  John 
Rogers  ?  This  tendency  toward  Socinianism,  we  think, 
is  plainly  manifested,  in  the  denial  of  the  eternal  filia- 
tion of  the  Son  of  God.  Again,  if  the  Spirit's  work 
is,  merely,  a  moral  suasion,  why  a  divine  and  almighty 
Spirit  ?  Must  not  the  mind,  which  denies  the  necessity 
of  an  omnipotent  influence,  be  strongly  tempted  to  dis- 
believe the  existence  of  an  omnipotent  Agent?" 


THE   CONVENTION   AND   ASSEMBLY   OF    1835.      435 

Having  finished  its  business,  the  Convention  ad- 
journed, after  making  record  of  its  conviction  that, 
"'under  the  smiles  and  blessings  of  God/^  the  Act  and 
Testimony  had  been  "of  marked  and  extensive  benefit 
to  our  beloved  Church/^  This  minute  Avas  made,  and 
the  Convention  closed  its  sessions,  a  few  moments  be- 
fore the  opening  of  the  Assembly  of  1835.  The  pro- 
ceedings of  that  body  very  soon  demonstrated  that  the 
Act  and  Testimony  had,  indeed,  exerted  a  most  potent 
and  salutary  influence,  throughout  the  Church. 

The  Rev.  J.  IL  C.  Leach,  of  Virginia,  and  the  Rev. 
W.  W.  Phillips,  D.  D.,  of  New  York,  a  signer  of  the 
Act  and  Testimony,  were  the  nominees  for  Moderator. 
Dr.  Phillips  was  elected,  by  one  hundred  and  seventeen 
votes,  to  eighty-three. 

The  principal  business,  transacted  by  this  Assembly, 
grew  out  of  the  memorial  of  the  Convention.  This 
paper  was  early  submitted  to  the  Assembly,  and  referred 
to  the  Committee  on  Bills  and  Overtures.  That  Com- 
mittee made  an  early  report,  recommending  a  reference 
of  the  several  subjects  included  in  the  memorial,  to 
appropriate  committees.  Upon  the  motion  to  adopt 
this  report.  Dr.  William  Hill  wished  time  to  consider. 
He  thought  it  was  giving  the  memorialists  undue  ad- 
vantage, to  have  their  memorial,  at  once,  committed,  to 
men,  perhaps,  who  were  familiar  with  the  whole  sub- 
ject. "  We  are  not  on  an  equal  footing.  The  memorial- 
ists have  used  a  new  system  of  tactics."  Dr.  William 
Wisner  demanded,  "  To  whom  are  we  to  commit  this 
memorial?  To  committees  appointed  by  one  of  the 
memorialists  (the  Moderator)?  One  of  the  committee 
of  overtures,  too,  is  a  memorialist.     While  the  house 


436  HISTORY  OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

is  acting  on  tlie  subject,  the  chair  should  be  occupied  by 
one  who  is  not  a  memorialist ;  and  every  memorialist 
should  withdraw.  Is  it  not  evident  how  the  memorial- 
ists will  act?  Will  they  not  sustain  the  memorial? 
Ought  they,  then,  to  be  on  the  committee,  or  to  ap- 
point it  V 

This  extraordinary  mode  of  securing  impartiality,  by 
excluding  from  the  house  all  who  had  avowed  them- 
selves in  favor  of  reform,  did  not  commend  itself  to  the 
approval  of  the  Assembly.  The  memorial  was  referred 
to  a  committee,  consisting  of  Drs.  Miller  and  Hoge, 
and  Rev.  Messrs.  Elliot  and  McElhenny,  and  Elders 
Stonestreet  and  Banks. 

This  committee,  after  several  days'  deliberation,  pre- 
sented a  report,  embodying  deliverances  on  each  of  the 
points  embraced  in  the  memorial ;  which,  after  full  dis- 
cussion and  amendment,  were  adopted  by  the  Assembly. 

The  first  point,  embraced  in  this  report,  had  respect 
to  the  examination  of  intrant  ministers,  by  the  Presby- 
teries to  which  they  apply.  The  right  of  such  exami- 
nation had  been  undisputed  in  the  earlier  history  of  the 
Church.  It  was  not  until  the  occurrence  of  Mr.  Barnes' 
case,  in  1830,  that  the  authority  of  the  Presbytery,  in 
this  matter,  seems  to  have  been  seriously  called  in  ques- 
tion. In  the  discussions  which  arose,  then  and  subse- 
quently, it  was  frequently  the  case  that  the  two  parties 
mutually  assumed  strangely  false  positions,  in  opposite 
directions.  The  Congrcgationalizing  New  School  men, 
anxious  to  protect  their  partisans  from  i\\e  dreaded  ex- 
amination, ran  to  the  extreme  of  denying,  altogether, 
the  peculiar  rights  and  duties  of  Presbyteries,  with 
respect   to   the  guardianship  of  their  own  particular 


THE   COXVEXTION   AND  ASSEMBLY   OF   1835.      437 

folds,  and  merged  all  in  the  unity  of  a  consolidated 
Church;  asserting  that  good  standing  in  one  Presby- 
tery entitled  the  party  to  the  same  standing  everywhere. 

On  the  other  hand,  Old  School  men,  in  their  zeal  to 
protect  themselves  from  the  spreading  sore  of  doctrinal 
error,  sometimes  assumed  ground  utterly  destructive  of 
the  authority  of  the  superior  courts,  and  of  the  whole 
Presbyterian  system ;  claiming  for  the  Pi'csbyteries,  an 
original,  independent,  and  unlimited  right  to  judge  of 
the  qualifications  of  their  own  members.  This  right  was 
deduced  from  the  false  assumption,  that  the  Presbyte- 
ries had  originally  created  the  Assembly  and  endowed 
it  with  such  functions  and  powers  as  they  saw  fit ;  re- 
taining to  themselves  all  such  as  they  did  not  thus 
expressly  alienate.  It  is  the  less  surjirising  that  ideas 
so  entirely  at  variance  with  the  facts  of  the  Churches 
history,  should  have  gained  prevalence;  because  the 
earlier  records  had  been  but  recently  recovered,  after 
having  been  long  lost ;  and  their  contents  w^ere  almost 
wholly  unknown. 

The  General  Assembly  avoided  the  extremes  of  both 
parties,  and  planted  itself  upon  the  true  principles  of 
scriptural  Presbyterianism.  In  determining  the  ques- 
tion in  discussion,  there  were  several  points  to  be  taken 
into  the  account.  The  Church  is  one  body,  of  which 
the  particular  Presbyteries  are  but  fractional  parts. 
The  whole  Church  has,  in  its  Constitution,  set  forth 
the  qualifications  to  be  required  of  its  ministry,  and 
enjoined  them  upon  the  various  judicatories,  under  an 
obligation,  by  which  all  alike  are  bound,  to  enforce 
them,  in  all  cases.  Those  judicatories  are  not  infalli- 
ble; neither  as  to  judgment,  nor  fidelity,  in  applying 

37* 


438  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

these  rules.  Each  particular  Presbytery  has  a  field  of 
its  own,  within  which  it  is  bound  to  see  that  the  laws 
of  the  Church,  as  to  the  qualifications  of  her  ministry, 
are  faithfully  obeyed.  This  does  not  imply  any  right 
of  Presbyteries  to  establish  new  terms  of  ministerial 
fellowship ;  but  simply  the  duty  of  enforcing  those 
already  established  by  the  Church.  In  every  Presby- 
terial  district  there  are  special  and  peculiar  considera- 
tions, additional  to  those  involved  in  general  ministerial 
fitness,  which  may  determine  for  or  against  the  pro- 
priety of  admitting  a  given  individual.  Every  worthy 
minister  does  not  suit  every  church,  nor  promise  to  be 
useful  in  every  Presbytery. 

A  Presbytery  is  not,  therefore,  to  assume,  that  all 
ministers  who  may  be  entitled  to  the  confidence  of 
other  Presbyteries,  are,  therefore,  qualified  and  entitled 
to  exercise  the  ministry  among  its  churches.  It  should 
be  satisfied,  not  only,  that  the  party  is  possessed  of  the 
prescribed  qualifications  for  the  ministry,  but  that  he 
has  such  as  give  reasonable  promise  of  edifying  the 
churches  under  its  charge.  And  as,  in  this,  it  is  acting 
as  a  member  of  the  whole  body,  any  irregularity  or 
error  in  its  action,  is  subject  to  revision  and  correction, 
by  the  higher  courts. 

In  accordance  with  these  principles,  the  Assembly 
pronounced  it  to  be  the  right  of  every  Presbytery  to  be 
fully  satisfied  as  to  the  qualifications  of  all  applicants ; 
and  that,  if  there  be  a  reasonable  doubt,  they  may  ex- 
amine them,  or  take  other  methods  of  gaining  the  neces- 
sary satisfaction ;  and  if  it  be  not  obtained,  may  decline 
receiving  them.  "  In  such  case,  it  shall  be  the  duty 
of    the   Presbytery  rejecting    the   applicant,  to    make 


THE  CONVENTION   AND   ASSEMBLY   OF    1835.      439 

known  Avhat  it  has  done,  to  the  Presbytery  from  which 
he  came,  witli  its  reasons.  It  being  always  understood, 
that  each  Presbytery  is,  in  this  concern,  as  in  all  others, 
responsible  for  its  acts  to  the  higher  judicatories/' 

The  decision  tluis  adopted  by  the  Assembly,  in  1835, 
was  re-enforced  in  1837,  with  the  injunction  requiring 
Presbyteries  to  examine  all  applicants  *'  at  least  on 
experimental  religion,  didactic  and  polemic  theology, 
and  church  government."*  By  thus  enforcing  exami- 
nation, in  all  cases,  greater  vigilance  is  secured ;  men 
of  unsound  views  are  warned  of  inevitable  detection, 
and  thus  deterred  from  seeking  admission ;  and,  where 
just  occasion  of  suspicion  arises,  and  examination  is  neces- 
sary, the  appearance  of  anything  invidious  is  avoided. 

Respecting  books  and  publications,  the  Assembly 
pronounced  that  it  is  the  right,  and  may  be  the  duty 
of  any  judicatory,  to  bear  testimony  against  them,  if 
erroneous,  "  and  this,  whether  the  author  be  living  or 
dead ;  whether  he  be  in  the  communion  of  the  Church 
or  not ;  whether  he  be  a  member  of  the  judicatory  ex- 
pressing the  opinion,  or  of  some  other,"  and  whether 
he  be  arraigned  or  not. 

Touching  elective  affinity  courts,  the  Assembly  was, 
at  first,  greatly  perplexed.  The  report  of  the  commit- 
tee was  not  consistent  with  itself  It,  in  the  first  place, 
decided  "  that  the  erection  of  church  courts,  and  espe- 
cially of  Presbyteries  and  Synods,  on  the  principle  of 
'elective  affinity,' that  is,  judicatories  not  bounded  by 
geographical  limits,  but  having  a  chief  regard,  in  their 
erection,  to  diversities  of  doctrinal  belief,  and  of  eccle- 
siastical polity,  is  contrary,  both  to  the  letter  and  spirit 
*  Minutes,  1837,  p.  429 ;  Digest,  p.  253. 


440  HISTOKY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

of  our  Constitution,  and  opens  a  wide  door  for  mischiefs 
and  abuses  of  the  most  serious  kind.  One  such  Pres- 
bytery, if  so  disposed,  might,  in  process  of  time,  fill 
the  whole  Church  with  unsound  and  schismatic  minis- 
ters ;  especially,  if  the  principle  were  adopted  that  regu- 
lar testimonials  must,  of  course,  secure  the  admission 
of  those  who  bore  them,  into  any  other  Presbytery, 
Such  a  Presbytery,  moreover,  being  without  geographi- 
,cal  bounds,  might  enter  the  limits  and  disturb  the 
repose  of  any  church,  into  which  it  might  think  proper 
to  intrude ;  and  thus  divide  churches,  stir  up  strife,  and 
promote  party  spirit  and  schism,  with  all  their  deplor- 
able consequences.  Surely,  a  plan  of  procedure  in  the 
Church  of  God,  which,  naturally,  and  almost  unavoid- 
ably, tends  to  produce  effects  such  as  these,  ought  to  be 
frowned  upon,  and,  as  soon  as  possible,  terminated  by 
the  supreme  j  udicatory  of  the  Church.''  / 

The  evils  here  enumerated  had  been  realized,  in  all 
their  enormity,  by  the  churches  of  Philadelphia  and  its 
vicinity.  Of  this,  the  Assembly,  itself,  had  abundant 
evidence,  in  the  coming  up  of  several  judicial  cases 
arising  out  of  the  intrusions  of  the  Assembly's  Second 
Presbytery,  and  consequent  distractions  and  divisions, 
in  the  churches  of  the  other  Presbyteries  of  the  vicinity. 
The  subject  was  illustrated,  by  facts  developed  in  the 
speeches  of  the  Eev.  S.  G.  Winchester,  and  Dr.  Miller. 
The  latter  had  become  fully  satisfied,  from  actual  obser- 
vation, of  the  unconstitutionality  of  the  plan  and  the 
unmitigated  evil  of  the  consequences.  The  resolution 
was  adopted. 

Here,  however,  a  very  perplexing  question  presented 
itself, — what  to  do  with  the  elective  affinity  Presbyte- 


THE   CONVENTION   AND   ASSEMBLY   OF    1835.      441 

ries  already  existing.  The  logical  conclusion  from  the 
j^remlses,  laid  down  In  the  foregoing  resolution,  was 
very  evident.  Dissolve  them,  and  connect  their  mem- 
bers and  churches  with  the  Presbyteries  to  which  they 
belonged,  geogra})hically.  But  there  were  members  of 
the  Assembly,  of  the  orthodox-moderate  class  suffi- 
ciently numerous  to  command  consideration,  who  ob- 
jected, most  earnestly,  to  giving,  thus,  practical  effect 
to  the  2)rinciples  which  they  had  just  united  in  adopt- 
ing. Besides,  the  members  of  the  regular  Presbyteries 
in  Philadelphia  desired,  indeed,  an  end  to  the  disorders 
incident  to  the  elective  affinity  system.  But  they  were 
alarmed  at  the  prospect  of  the  discomfort  and  embar- 
rassments, which  would  result  to  them,  from  the  intro- 
duction into  their  Presbyteries  of  the  uncongenial  and 
unsound  elements,  which  had  gained  strength  and  organ- 
ization, under  the  fostering  wings  of  the  obnoxious 
Presbytery. 

These  various  considerations  prevailed  in  the  com- 
mittee ;  which  recommended  to  the  Assembly  a  resolu- 
tion, recommending  that  the  Assembly's  Second  Presby- 
tery "  ought,  for  the  sake  of  peace  and  order,  to  confine 
itself  to  those  churches  wdiich  were  expressly  included  in 
the  original  act  of  erection ;  and  ought  not,  hereafter, 
either  to  add  to  the  number  of  its  ministerial  members, 
or  to  receive,  as  candidates  for  license,  any  others  than 
those  who  naturally  belong  to  some  one  or  more  of  the 
chui'ches  already  under  their  care." 

The  committee  also  advised  that  the  Assembly  allow 
any  members  or  churches  of  this  Presbytery,  who  may 
wish  to  join  eitlier  of  the  other  Presbyteries,  to  do  so ; 
and  tliat  the  Synod  of  New  York  be  requested  to  read- 


442  HISTORY    OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

just    its    Presbyteries   so   as    to   obviate   the   evils  of 
elective  affinity  there  realized. 

As  a  substitute  for  these  resolutions,  the  Rev.  Dr. 
Elliot  moved  the  dissolution  of  the  Synod  of  Delaware, 
and  the  Assembly's  Second  Presbytery,  and  the  restora- 
tion of  their  elements  to  their  proper  relations.  After 
a  full  discussion,  when  it  was  evident  that  Dr.  Elliot's 
paper  was  about  to  be  adopted,  Dr.  Ely  brought  in  a 
proposition,  as  a  compromise  : — 

"  Resolved,  That  at  and  after  the  next  meeting  of  the 
Synod  of  Philadelphia,  to  be  held  in  York,  Pa.,  in 
October  next,  the  Synods  of  Philadelphia  and  Delaware 
shall,  and  hereby  are  declared  to  be  united  and  one, 
embracing  all  the  Presbyteries  belonging  to  the  two 
Synods,  and  to  be  known  as  the  Synod  of  Philadelphia ; 
and  that  the  Synod  of  Philadelphia,  thus  constituted, 
by  the  union,  aforesaid,  shall  take  such  order  concerning 
the  organization  of  its  several  Presbyteries  as  may  be 
deemed  expedient  and  constitutional ;  and  that  said 
Synod,  if  it  shall  deem  it  desirable,  make  application  to 
the  next^  General  Assembly,  for  such  a  division  of  the 
Synod  as  may  best  suit  the  convenience  of  all  its 
Presbyteries,  and  promote  the  glory  of  God." 

The  olive  branch  thus  tendered,  in  a  spirit  so  seem- 
ingly commendable,  was,  at  once,  cordially  accepted,  by 
the  Old  School  majority.  Dr.  Miller  proposed  an 
amendment  to  the  first  clause  of  the  resolution,  in  these 
words  : — 

"  Resolved,  That  at  and  after  the  meeting  of  the 
Synod  of  Philadelphia,  in  October  next,  the  Synod  of 
Delaware,  shall  be  dissolved,  and  that  the  Presbyteries 


THE   CONVENTION   AND   ASSEMBLY   OF    1835.      443 

constituing    the   same   shall    be,    then    and    thereafter, 
annexed  to  the  Synod  of  Philadelphia/^ 

The  amendment  was  readily  accepted,  and  the  resolu- 
tion, thus  modified,  was  passed  by  a  unanimous  vote ; 
unless  there  may  have  been  one  feeble,  "No/'  Several 
papers,  with  reference  to  some  of  the  divisive  proceed- 
ings of  the  Elective  Affinity  Presbytery,  were  then 
withdrawn,  and  all  further  proceedings  thereon  dropped, 
by  common  consent,  amid  mutual  congratulations,  and 
general  joy. 

We  shall  hereafter  see  the  use  subsequently  made  of 
Dr.  Miller's  amendment,  and  how  little  ground  there 
was  for  the  pleasant  anticipations  now  realized.  «^ 

As  to  the  operations  of  voluntary  societies,  the  As- 
sembly, declared  it  inexpedient  to  prohibit  them,  but 
pronounced  it  "the  first  and  binding  duty  of  the 
Presbyterian  Church  to  sustain  her  own  Boards ;"  and 
admonished  voluntary  societies  "  neither  to  educate, 
nor  send  forth,  as  Presbyterians,  any  individuals  known 
to  hold  sentiments  contrary  to  the  Word  of  God  and 
the  standards  of  the  Presbyterian  Church." 

With  respect  to  the  Plan  of  Union,  the  report 
of  the  committee  recommended  that  it  be  repealed,  as 
unconstitutional  and  injurious  to  the  peace  and  welfare 
of  the  Church. 

Dr.  Fisher  announced  himself  in  favor  of  rescinding 
the  compact  with  the  Congregationalists,  if  it  were  done 
in  a  decorous  manner.  He  gave  a  history  of  the  matter, 
according  to  which  it  appeared  that,  formerly,  the  Con- 
gregationalists from  New  England  being  active  and 
enterprising  in  the  Western  country,  the  General  As- 
sembly had  invited  them  to  throw  in  their  strength,  to 


444  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

build  up  and  enlarge  the  Presbyteries  in  that  region. 
A  mutual  compact  having  thus  been  made,  courtesy 
required  that  a  committee  be  appointed  to  confer  with 
the  Association  of  Connecticut  and  secure  its  consent, 
before  proceeding  to  repeal  the  plan. 

Dr.  Miller  confirmed  the  account  of  Dr.  Fisher.  He 
was  a  member  of  the  Assembly  of  1801.  "The  offer 
came  from  us.'' 

Other  members  objected  to  the  proposed  repeal,  that 
it  would  involve  the  dissolution  of  the  Presbyteries  and 
Synods  which  had  grown  up  under  it.  Mr.  Hanford, 
of  the  Western  Reserve,  deprecated  the  measure,  on 
this  ground.  "  It  would  strike  at  the  root  of  the  exist- 
ence of  his  Synod.'' 

Dr.  Miller  explained,  that  the  design  of  the  resolu- 
tion was  wholly  prospective ;  and  Dr.  Beman  hoped 
that  this  would  be  distinctly  indicated  in  the  minute. 

Drs.  Fisher  and  Miller,  were  mistaken  as  to  the  his- 
tory of  the  Plan.  It  was  no  "  compact,"  and  did  not 
originate  with  the  Assembly.  Their  statements,  how- 
ever, determined  the  action  of  the  Assembly;  which 
adopted  a  substitute  proposed  by  the  latter, — 

"  Resolved,  That  this  Assembly  deem  it  no  longer 
desirable  that  churches  should  be  formed  in  our  Presby- 
terian connection,  agreeably  to  the  plan  adopted  by  the 
Assembly  and  the  General  Association  of  Connecticut, 
in  1801.  Therefore,  resolved,  that  our  brethren  of  the 
General  Association  of  Connecticut  be,  and  they  hereby 
are,  respectfully  requested  to  consent,  that  said  plan 
shall  be,  from  and  after  the  next  meeting  of  that 
Association,  declared  to  be  annulled.  And  resolved, 
that  the  annulling  of  said  plan  shall  not,  in  any  wise,     I 


THE   CONVENTION   AND   ASSEMBLY   OF    1835.        445 

interfere  with  the  existence  and  lawful  operation  of 
churches  which  have  been  already  formed  on  this 
plan/^ 

This  was,  to  request  the  Greneral  Association  to  per- 
mit us  to  cease  from  introducing  disorderly  churches 
into  our  bosom  ;  it  being  a  covenant  condition,  that  we 
will  never  attempt  to  correct  the  disorders,  already 
introduced. 

The  Stated  Clerk  of  the  Assembly  neglected  to  com- 
municate this  proposition  to  the  delegate  appointed  to 
the  Association  of  Connecticut.  That  body,  therefore, 
took  no  action  on  the  subject,  and  our  Church  thus 
providentially  escaped  the  snare  of  the  pro^^osed 
covenant. 

The  Assembly  declined  to  terminate  the  system  of 
correspondence  then  maintained  with  the  New  England 
churches,  as  proposed  in  the  memorial. 

As  to  doctrinal  errors,  it  declared  the  painful  convic- 
tion that  the  errors  specified  in  the  memorial  do  exist ; 
that  they  '^  are  not  distinguishable  from  Pelagian  or 
Arminian  errors ;"  and  the  holding  of  them  is  wholly 
incompatible  with  an  honest  adoption  of  the  Confes- 
sion. The  Assembly,  therefore,  bore  solemn  testimony 
against  them ;  and  enjoined  the  inferior  courts  "  to 
exercise  the  utmost  vigilance  in  guarding  against 
the  introduction  and  publication  of  such  pestiferous 
errors.'^ 

On  the  subject  of  foreign  missions,  action  was  taken, 
which  will  appear  in  another  place. 

When  the  Assembly  of  1835  adjourned,  the  preva- 
lent feeling  among  the  Old  School  men  of  the  Church, 
was  one  of  thankfulness  and  congratulation,  that  the 

38 


446  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW  SCHOOL. 

battle  was  fought  and  the  purity  and  peace  of  the 
Church  vindicated.  Bright  hopes  were  cherished  for 
the  future, — hopes  doomed  to  disappointment.  Dark 
and  troublous  days  must  yet  be  seen,  before  the  return 
of  peace  and  prosperity. 


CHAPTER    XXIX. 

THE   WESTERN   FOREIGN   MISSIONARY   SOCIETY. 

Conferences  in  Baltimore  respecting  Foreign  Missions — Action  of  the 
Presbytery — Application  to  Dr.  Rice — Published  circular — Dr. 
Rice's  overture  to  the  Assembly — A  committee  to  confer  with  the 
American  Board — Dr.  Swift's  overture  to  the  Synod  of  Pittsburgh — 
Western  Foreign  Missionary  Society  organized — Report  of  the 
committee  of  conference — Dr.  Miller's  resolution  in  the  Board — 
Discussion  and  action  of  the  Assembly — State  of  the  Society  in 
1835 — Proposed  transfer  to  the  Assembly. 

We  have  seen  the  process  of  absorption  by  which,  in 
1828,  the  Church  had  been  stripped  of  its  Foreign 
Missions,  for  the  benefit  of  the  American  Board.  The 
condition  of  things  thus  induced  was  not  viewed  with- 
out profound  emotion,  by  many,  throughout  the  Church. 
In  Baltimore,  it  immediately  became  a  subject  of  anxious 
deliberation,  in  the  weekly  conferences  of  the  pastors. 
After  more  than  a  year  of  private  discussion,  the  sub- 
ject was  brought  into  the  Presbytery,  under  the  convic- 
tion and  desire  that  the  Presbyterian  Church,  as  such, 
should  exert  itself,  more  directly,  and  efficiently  in  the 
cause  of  foreign  missions.  "  It  was  felt  to  be  her 
imperative  duty,  which  she  could  not  neglect,  without 
great  guilt ;  and  absolutely  essential  to  her  piety  and 
permanent  prosperity.  It  was  believed  that  the  only 
organization  which  then  existed, — the  American  Board, 

447 


448  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL.       • 

— could  never  call  into  action  the  latent  energies  of  the 
whole  Church ;  and  that  something  was  required  from 
among  ourselves,  to  accomplish  this  transcendently 
important  object.  Accordingly,  the  Rev.  Dr.  John 
Breckinridge  introduced  the  preamble  and  resolution 
of  the  6th  of  October,  1830,  which  were  unanimously 
adopted  by  the  Presbytery."* 

This  first  minute  was  as  follows :  "  Whereas,  in  the 
view  of  this  Presbytery,  the  Presbyterian  Church,  with 
which  we  are  connected,  in  general,  and  we  as  a  Pres- 
bytery, in  particular,  have  to  a  most  inexcusable  degree, 
neglected  the  claims  of  Foreign  Missions;  and  whereas, 
the  present  state  of  the  heathen  world,  as  well  as  the 
last  command  of  our  Divine  Redeemer,  most  urgently 
call  us  to  exert  ourselves  in  this  noble  cause ;  therefore 

'^  Resolved,  That  we,  as  a  body,  will  make  the  at- 
tempt, from  this  time,  to  support  at  least  one  missionary, 
from  year  to  year,  in  the  foreign  tield.^t 

The  views  of  these  brethren,  however,  contemplated 
nothing  less  than  bringing  up  the  whole  Presbyterian 
Church,  in  her  organic  capacity,  to  this  blessed  work. 
A  few  days  after  the  adoption  of  the  above  resolution, 
the  Rev.  Dr.  John  H.  Rice  passed  through  Baltimore. 
In  the  parlor  of  Dr.  Nevlns,  he  was  waited  upon  by  a 
committee  to  which  the  subject  had  been  referred  by 
the  Presbytery,  and  urged  to  prepare  a  paper,  Avhich 
.  might  arouse  the  attention  of  the  Church,  and  secure, 
in  some  form,  the  contemplated  end.  For  no  one  was, 
as  yet,  clear,  as  to  the  precise  mode  of  action  to  be 

*  Rev.  Dr.  G.  W.  Musgrave  in  the  Baltimore  Magazine,   1838, 
p.  222. 

t  Baltimore  Magazine,  1838,  p.  221. 


THE   WESTERN   FOEEIGX   MISSIONARY   SOCIETY.     449 

adopted.  All  venerated  the  American  Board,  and  were 
embarrassed,  in  considering  the  duty  and  privilege  of 
the  Church  on  the  subject,  by  respect  to  the  plans  and 
policy  of  that  institution.  Dr.  Rice  promised  "to  think 
of  it;"  and  fulfilled  the  promise,  by  his  overture  to  the 
General  Assembly,  which  was  dictated  from  his  death- 
bed a  short  time  afterward. 

It  was  at  this  conference,  in  Dr.  Nevins'  study,  that 
the  phrase, — ^^the  Presbyterian  Church  a  Missionciry 
Society/^ — true  as  it  was  to  the  facts  of  her  history,  was 
fixed  upon  as  the  rallying-call  to  the  Church.* 

On  the  ISth  of  March,  1831,  the  committee  of  the 
Presbytery  published  a  circular  letter  on  this  subject. 
"  Our  Church,"  say  they,  "  affords  peculiar  facilities  for 
combined,  uniform,  and  powerful  operations,  in  this 
way.  It  is  organized  already,  and  only  needs  to  be  set 
in  motion,  in  order  to  make  it  a  most  efficient  missionary 
institution.  The  plan  proposed  above,  of  operating 
through  the  Presbyteries,  seems  to  be  at  once  the  most 
simple  and  effective." 

Again,  "  In  proposing  this  plan,  it  is  by  no  means 
intended  to  interfere  with  other  societies,  already  engaged 
in  missions.  On  the  contrary,  the  object  is,  to  co-operate 
with  them,  as  far  as  possible  to  do  so.  But  the  Assem- 
bly's Board  of  Missions  is  fully  occupied  on  our  own 
continent,  and  has  no  purpose  of  effort  beyond  the  two 
Americas.  The  American  Home  Missionary  Society  is 
exclusively  domestic,  as  its  name  imports ;  and  the 
American  Board  of  Commissioners  for  Foreign  Mis- 
sions needs  some  such  combined  effort  as  this,  to  bring 
up  '  to  the  help  of  the  Lord  against  the  mighty,'  the 

*  Foote's  Virginia,  vol.  ii.,  p.  497.  ^ 

38* 


450  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

whole  Presbyterian  Church.  The  details  of  the  plan 
may  be  left  for  future  consultation.  But  the  principle 
of  operation  might  be  at  once  adopted ;  the  whole 
Church  might  be  simultaneously  excited  through  the 
Presbyteries;  and  the  Avay  be  thus  prepared  to  send 
forth,  from  one  hundred  Presbyteries,  one  hundred  mis- 
sionaries to  the  foreign  field.  Dear  brethren,  we  are 
wedded  to  no  peculiar  plan;  but  we  feel  that  something 
must  be  done ;  that  it  must  be  done  at  once ;  and  that 
it  must  be  done  by  all  the  Church;  and  with  all  our 
heart,  and  soul,  and  mind,  and  strength."* 

This  circular,  signed  on  behalf  of  the  Presbytery,  by 
William  Nevins,  George  Morrison,  George  W.  Mus- 
grave,  and  John  Breckinridge,  prepared  the  way  for  the 
overture  of  Dr.  Rice,  and  excited  the  Irope  and  expecta- 
tion that  the  Church  would  be  induced  to  make  a  pro- 
portionate response  to  the  call  of  duty,  so  impressively 
urged. 

Dr.  Rice  had  already  indicated  the  hold  which  the 
subject  had  taken  on  his  mind.  On  the  22d  of  Novem- 
ber, 1830,  he  MTote  to  the  Rev.  Dr.  B.  B.  Wisner,  Secre- 
tary of  the  American  Board.  In  this  remarkable  letter, 
he  surveys  with  anxiety  and  alarm  the  undeveloped 
indications  of  the  coming  strife  in  the  Church,  and  the 
growing  estrangement  between  the  Congregational  and 
Presbyterian  elements.  "  I  do  think,  that,  in  a  year  or 
two,  there  has  been  a  considerable  increase  of  local  and 
sectarian  feelings  among  Congregationalists  and  Presby- 
terians. That  these  two  denominations  are  further  apart 
than  they  were  some  years  ago,  is  manifest.  I  thought, 
too,  that  during  my  visit  to  Boston,  I  saw  tokens  of  a 
*  Baltimore  Magazine,  1838,  p.  223. 


THE   WESTERN   FOREIGN   MISSIONARY   SOCIETY.     451 

growth  in  the  strength  of  Xew  England  feeling.  Pres- 
byterian feeling  also  is  considerably  roused  up." 

"  I  want  some  of  my  beloved  New  England  friends 
to  come  to  Philadelphia^  [to  the  Assembly,]  just  to  try- 
to  get  good,  and  to  do  good ;  to  come  without  feeling 
that  they  belong  to  New  England,  but  that  they  belong 
to  Christ  and  his  Church  ;  not  to  say  one  \Yord  about  any 
matter  in  dispute  among  Christians,  but  determined  to 

know  nothing  but  Christ  and  him  crucified I 

wish,  too,  that  some  plan  might  be  devised  for  kindling 
up  in  the  Presbyterian  Church,  the  true  spirit  of  mis- 
sions, and  rousing  this  sluggish  body  from  sleep.  Here 
is  a  subject  of  delicacy  and  difficulty.  The  Presbyterian 
spirit  has  been  so  awakened  up,  that  I  begin  to  appre- 
hend that  no  power  of  man  will  ever  bring  the  whole 
body  to  unite  under  what  is  thought  to  be  a  Congrega- 
tional Board.  But  the  Church  must  not  be  under  the 
guilt  of  letting  souls  perish,  who  might  be  saved. 
What  can  be  done  ?  Here  we  want  wisdom.  I  never 
will  do  anything  to  injure  the  wisest  and  best  missionary 
society  in  the  world,  the  American  Board.  But  can  no 
ingenuity  devise  a  scheme  of  a  Presbyterian  Branch  of 
the  American  Board, — co-ordinate, — sufficiently  con- 
nected with  the  General  Assembly  to  satisfy  scrupulous 
Presbyterians,  yet  in  union  with  the  original  Board, — 
having  the  same  object,  and  tending  to  the  same  result? 
Do  think  of  this.  Something  must  be  done;  but  I 
cannot  say  what."* 

"  A  Presbyterian  branch,  co-ordinate,  sufficiently  con- 
nected \yith  the  General  Assembly,  yet  in  union  with 
the  original  Board  ;" — such  was  the  concej)tion  of  this 
*  Maxwell's  Memoir  of  Kiee,  pp.  380,  383. 


452  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW  SCHOOL. 

departing  servant  of  Christ.  On  the  next  Sabbath  he 
preached  his  last  sermon.  Had  the  men  to  whom  he 
addressed  himself  been  worthy,  what  a  sublime  specta- 
cle Avould  the  Congregational  and  Presbyterian  Churches 
have  now  presented, — one  in  faith  and  love ;  indepen- 
dent, yet  united ;  together  laboring  for  the  world's  con- 
version, through  the  instrumentality  of  organizations, 
co-ordinate,  and  operating  each  freely,  in  its  own  sphere, 
yet  maintaining  mutual  understanding,  concert,  and 
co-operation  in  their  plans,  to  the  furtherance  of  the 
one  end  ! 

To  Rice^s  call  for  New  England  men  in  the  Assem- 
bly, who  should  "come  without  feeling  that  they  belong 
to  New  England,^'  and  '^  not  to  say  one  word  about  any 
matter  in  dispute,"  the  response  was  the  presence  and 
labors  of  Mr.  Bacon,  on  behalf  of  Mr.  Barnes,  and  his 
subsequent  insults  over  Presbyterianism  as  a  failure. 
To  the  proposition  for  a  co-ordinate  Board,  the  reply 
was, — without  alternative, — the  American  Board,  and 
that  only. 

In  fulfihiient  of  his  sublime  conception.  Dr.  Rice  dic- 
tated to  an  amanuensis,  from  his  sick-bed,  the  overture 
on  missions,  which  was  laid  before  the  Assembly  of 
1831.'''  This  paper,  in  the  preamble,  se^t  forth  the  evan- 
gelization of  the  world  as  being  tlie  pre-eminent  office 
of  the  Church,  according  to  the  institution  of  Jesus 
Christ.  It  recognized  the  divine  favor,  bestowed  upon 
the  American  Board,  and  expressed  an  earnest  desire 
to  co-operate  with  it.  It  then  proposed  a  series  of  reso- 
lutions, predicated  upon  the  proposition  "  that  the  Pres- 
byterian Church  in  the  United  States  is  a  missionary 

*  The  overture  will  be  found  iu  the  Assembly's  Digest,  p.  363. 


THE   WESTERN   FOREIGN   MISSIONARY   SOCIETY.     453 

society,  the  object  of  which  is,  to  aid  in  the  conversion 
of  the  world  ;  and  that  every  member  of  the  Chnrch  is 
a  member  for  life  of  said  society,  and  bound,  in  main- 
tenance of  his  Christian  character,  to  do  all  in  his  power 
for  the  accomplishment  of  this  object/'  The  plan  pro- 
vided that  the  Assembly  appoint  from  year  to  year  a 
"  Committee  of  the  Presbyterian  Church  in  the  United 
States,  for  Foreign  Missions,"  "  to  whose  management 
this  whole  concern  shall  be  confided,  with  directions  to 
report  all  their  transactions  to  the  churches.  The  Com- 
mittee shall  have  power  to  appoint  a  Chairman,  Cor- 
responding Secretary,  Treasurer,  and  other  necessary 
officers.  The  Committee  shall,  as  far  as  the  nature  of 
the  case  will  admit,  be  co-ordinate  with  the  American 
Board  of  Commissioners  for  Foreign  Missions,  and  shall 
correspond  and  co-operate  with  that  association,  in  every 
possible  way,  for  the  accomplishment  of  the  great  ob- 
jects which  it  has  in  view.'' 

We  have  already  seen  the  complexion  and  spirit  of 
the  Assemblv  of  1831,  before  which  this  overture  came. 
It  was  controlled  bv  those*  who,  in  1826,  had  attempted 
to  bind  the  xlssembly  by  solemn  covenant  to  the  Ameri- 
can Board.  Dr.  Miller  states,  that,  a  year  or  two  later, 
^'  a  proposal  was  privately  made,  by  some  of  the  friends 
of  the  American  Board,  that  the  General  Assembly 
should  pass  a  solemn  act,  binding  itself,  or,  at  least, 
resolving,  not  to  undertake  any  separate  foreign  mission- 
ary enterprise.  This  proposition,  however,  was  firmly 
resisted,"  and,  for  the  time,  defeated.*  The  attempt 
was  now  made  to  use  the  occasion  of  Rice's  overture  to 
accomplish  this  cherished  object. 

*  Miller's  Letters  to  Presbyterians,  Letter  V. 


454  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

The  overture  was  referred  to  a  committee  of  five, 
who  recommended  that  a  committee  of  three  be  ap- 
pointed to  confer  with  the  American  Board,  as  to 
measures  to  be  adopted  for  enlisting  the  Church  more 
fully  in  the  work  of  foreign  missions,  and  report  to  the 
next  Assembly.  This  proposal  was  adopted,  and  the 
committee  of  conference  elected  by  ballot.  The  Rev. 
Drs.  John  McDowell,  Thomas  McAuley,  and  James 
Richards,  were  the  New  School  nominees,  and  were 
elected ;  while  the  Rev.  Drs.  A.  Alexander,  John 
Breckinridge,  and  E.  P.  Swift,  the  Old  School  nominees, 
were  appointed  alternates.  Dr.  Rice  was  still  living. 
When  he  heard  the  names  of  the  committee,  he  re- 
marked that  "  some  of  the  alternates,  he  thought, 
understood  his  views  better  than  some  of  the  prin- 
cipals.''* 

After  the  result  of  this  vote  had  been  ascertained,  two 
commissioners  from  the  Synod  of  Pittsburgh, — the  Rev. 
W.  C.  Anderson,  and  the  Rev.  E.  P.  Swift, — happened 
together,  on  the  steps  of  the  church  where  the  Assem- 
bly met.  "  What  is  now  to  be  done  ?"  said  the  former. 
"  We  must  go  home,"  was  the  reply,  "  and  revive  our 
Western  Missionary  Society."  Upon  the  return  of 
these  members  from  the  Assembly,  this  suggestion  was 
anxiously  weighed  by  brethren  of  the  Pittsburgh  Synod, 
first  among  whom,  in  these  consultations,  beside  those 
already  named,  were  the  Rev.  Thomas  D.  Baird,  and 
the  Rev.  Alan  D.  Campbell.  The  result  was  the 
introduction,  by  Dr.  Swift,  of  an  overture  to  the  Synod 
of  Pittsburgh,  in  pursuance  of  which  that  body  resolved 
to  resume  its  missionary  organization  and  work. 
♦  Foole's  Sketches  of  Virginia,  ii.  439. 


THE   WESTERN   FOREIGN    MISSIONARY   SOCIETY.     455 

In  this  overture,  a  survey  was  taken  of  the  aspects  of 
Providence,  as  calling  the  Church,  in  every  land,  to  the 
work  of  missions.  The  efforts  already  put  forth,  and  labors 
and  results  accomplished  by  the  servants  of  Christ,  were 
recognized.  Especially  and  with  pleasure  "the  truly 
splendid  operations  of  the  American  Board"  were 
referred  to  "with  none  but  unmingled  feelings  of 
respect  and  affection .'' 

"  Nor  do  the  Synod  regard  it  as  improper  to  recur, 
with  grateful  sentiments,  to  those  humbler  efforts  which 
they  have  been  enabled,  in  departed  years,  to  put  forth, 
through  the  AYestern  Missionary  Society,  in  this  great 
and  good  cause.  Still,  however,  much  remains  to  be 
done.  The  resources  of  large  districts  of  the  Presby- 
terian Church  are  slumbering  in  inaction,  and  experience, 
for  a  few  years  past,  has  demonstrated  the  fact  that  they 
*cannot  be  drawn  forth  by  a  society  so  remote  as  the 
American  Board ;  or  by  any  that  does  not  involve  an 
ecclesiastical  organization,  comporting  with  the  honest 
predilections  of  many  of  our  people." 

It  was,  therefore,  resolved  "that  it  is  expedient 
forthwith,  to  establish  a  society  or  board  for  foreign 
missions,  on  such  a  plan  as  will  admit  of  the  co-opera- 
tion of  such  parts  of  the  Presbyterian  Church  as  may 
think  proper  to  unite  with  it,  in  this  great  and  import- 
ant concern." 

The  first  article  of  the  Constitution  provided  that 
"  This  Society  shall  be  composed  of  the  Ministers,  Ses- 
sions and  Churches  of  the  Synod  of  Pittsburgh,  to- 
gether with  those  of  any  other  Synod  or  Synods, 
Presbytery  or  Presbyteries,  that  may  hereafter  formally 
unite  with  them ;  and  shall  be  known  by  the  name  of 


456  HISTOEY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

The  Western  Foreign  Missionary  Society  of  the  United 
States/^ 

*  A  Board  of  Directors  was  immediately  chosen,  con- 
sisting of  six  Ministers  and  six  Ruling  Elders,  residing 
in  the  vicinity  of  Pittsburgh,  together  Avith  one  minis- 
ter and  one  elder  from  each  Presbytery  belonging  to  the 
Synod.  Provision  was  also  made  for  the  admission 
of  a  Minister  and  Elder  from  each  Presbytery  belong- 
ing to  any  other  Synod,  which  might  enter  into  co- 
operation on  this  plan. 

The  first  officers  of  the  Society  were  the  Hon.  Har- 
mer  Denny,  President,  Pev.  Thomas  D.  Baird,  Vice 
President,  Pev.  E.  P.  Swift,  Corresponding  Secretary, 
Pev.  Elisha  McCurdy,  Treasurer. 

In  the  Assembly  of  1832,  Dr.  McAuley,  from  the 
committee  of  conference  with  the  American  Board,  sub- 
mitted a  report,  signed  jointly  by  the  committee  and  by 
the  Pev.  Drs.  Jeremiah  Day,  Lyman  Beecher,  and  B. 
B.  Wisner,  a  committee  on  behalf  of  the  Board.  This 
report  entered  into  an  elaborate  argument,  to  prove  that 
the  Board  is  ^^  properly  a  national  institution  ;" — that  it 
"  sustains  the  same  relation  to  the  Congregational, 
Presbyterian,  and  Dutch  Peformed  churches,  and  fairly 
represents  each  of  these  religious  denominations  /' — 
and,  in  short,  that  there  should  be  but  one  foreign  mis- 
sionary institution,  sustained  by  those  denominations, 
and  the  Board  should  be  that  institution. 

The  conclusions  to  which  the  joint  committees  of  con- 
ference came  were,  "that  it  is  wholly  inexpedient  to 
attempt  the  formation  of  any  other  distinct  organization, 
within  the  three  denominations,  for  conducting  foreign 


THE    WESTERN   FOREIGN   MISSIONARY   SOCIETY.     457 

missions ;  and  that  it  is  of  the  highest  importance  to 
their  own  spiritual  prosperity,  and  to  the  extension  of 
tlie  Redeemer's  kingdom,  in  the  earth,  that  the  ecclesi- 
astical bodies  and  the  individual  churches  in  these  con- 
nections should  give  to  the  American  Board  of  Com- 
missioners for  Foreign  Missions  their  cordial,  united, 
and  vigorous  support. 

^'  In  reference  to  the  particular  topic,  named  in  the 
resolution  of  the  General  Assembly  of  the  Presbyterian 
Church,  appointing  their  committee,  viz. :  ^  Measures  to 
be  adopted  for  enlisting  the  energies  of  the  Presbyterian 
Church  more  extensively  in  the  cause  of  missions  to 
the  heathen,'  the  committees  of  conference  are  of  opin- 
ion that  but  two  things  are  wanting,  to  secure  the  de- 
sired result ; — that  the  Prudential  Committee  of  the 
American  Board  should  take  prompt  and  efficient  mea- 
sures, by  agencies  and  other  ways,  to  bring  the  subject 
of  foreign  missions,  in  its  various  relations,  before  the 
individual  congregations  and  members  of  the  Presbyte- 
rian body ;  and  that  the  General  Assembly  and  subor- 
dinate judicatories  of  that  Church  give  their  distinct 
and  efficient  sanction  and  aid  to  the  measures  that  shall 
be  adopted,  for  this  purpose." 

With  the  report,  were  submitted  a  series  of  resolu- 
tions, which  do  not  appear  in  any  of  the  published 
accounts  of  the  proceedings.  Their  purport  may  be 
gathered  from  what  follows.  When  this  report  was 
under  consideration  before  the  American  Board,  the 
Rev.  Dr.  Miller,  who  was  present,  as  a  member  of  the 
Board,  offered  the  following  minute,  as  further  express- 
ive of  its  mind  on  the  subject, — 

"  While  this  Board  accept  and  approve  the  foregoing 

39 


458  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

report,  as  expressing  their  firm  opinion,  on  the  subject 
referred  to  the  Committee  of  Conference, — 

"  Resolved,  That  if  the  General  Assembly  of  the 
Presbyterian  Church,  or  any  of  its  subordinate  judica- 
tories, shall  eventually  think  proper  to  form  any  asso- 
ciation for  conducting  foreign  missions,  separately  from 
the  American  Board,  this  Board  will  regard  such  asso- 
ciation with  fraternal  feelings,  and  without  the  least 
disposition  to  interfere  with  its  organization  or  pro- 
ceedings/^ 

"  This  amendment,"  says  Dr.  Miller,  ^^  was  very  un- 
ceremoniously negatived ;  two  other  members  of  the 
Board,  only, — so  far  as  I  recollect, — viz.;  Dr.  Sjjring, 
of  New  York,  and  Dr.  Carnahan,  of  Princeton,  rising 
in  its  favor."* 

This  took  place,  at  the  meeting  of  the  Board  in  Oc- 
'tober,  1831 ;  and  occurred  in  view  of  the  fact,  which 
was  publicly  known,  that  the  Synod  of  Pittsburgh  was, 
at  that  very  time,  about  to  revive  the  Western  Mis- 
sionary Society. 

When  the  report  of  the  committee  came  before  the 
Assembly  of  1832,  it  is  possible  that,  had  matters  re- 
mained as  when  the  committee  was  appointed,  the  As- 
sembly might  have  been  induced  to  accept  the  bonds 
forged  for  them,  by  the  committee  and  the  Board. 
But,  in  the  mean  time,  the  Western  Society  had  been 
organized.  Already,  it  had  chosen  Africa  as  its  first 
field  of  operations.  The  funds  were  in  its  treasury, 
and  the  first  missionaries  chosen.  And  the  announce- 
ment of  these  facts, — the  report  that  the  Presbyterian 

*  Dr.  Miller's  Letter  to  Dr.  McElhenny,  in  the  Presbyterian,  1837, 
p.  62. 


THE   WESTERN   FOREIGN   MISSIONARY   SOCIETY.     459 

Church  was  about  to  be  known  again  among  the  hea- 
then, had  excited  in  the  bosom  of  the  churches  an  in- 
terest and  aroused  emotions  which  commanded  respect, 
and  set  a  ban  upon  the  present  proi30sal. 

In  the  discussion  that  ensued,  Mr.  Baird,  the  Vice 
President  of  the  -Western  Society,  gave  voice  to  these 
sentiments, — '^  I  am  a  friend  of  tlie  American  Board. 
But  passing  those  resokitions  will  do  it  more  hurt  than 
good.  There  is  a  spirit  rising,  in  the  West,  for  a  sepa- 
rate movement,  on  ecclesiastical  principles.  The  Synod 
of  Pittsburgh  has,  already,  organized  a  foreign  mission- 
ary society.  The  missionaries  are  selected,  and  the  funds 
secured,  to  commence  their  operations.  This  is  so  or- 
ganized that  it  may  be  transferred  to  the  General  As- 
sembly, and  placed  under  its  ecclesiastical  supervision, 
whenever  it  shall  be  judged  expedient  for  the  Assembly 
to  take  up  the  work  of  foreign  missions.  Those  who 
are  opposed  to  the  whole  princij^le  of  voluntary  asso- 
ciations may  here  be  enlisted  under  an  ecclesiastical 
organization ;  and  feelings  will  be  awakened  in  favor 
of  foreign  missions,  which  the  Board  never  could  reach. 
But  if  these  resolutions  are  passed,  in  view  of  the  fact 
that  a  Western  Board  has  already  been  established, 
many  will  feel  that  the  Assembly  and  the  American 
Board  have  set  up  too  high  and  exclusive  a  claim  in 
behalf  of  that  institution." 

Dr.  Alexander  objected  to  the  resolutions,  "  because 
they  will  so  commit  the  Assembly,  that  we  cannot  with 
propriety,  at  any  time,  or  for  any  reasons,  organize  a 
Board  of  foreign  missions.  It  also  contains  a  virtual 
censure  of  the  society  already  formed  at  Pittsburgh. 
So  long  a  report  ought  never  to  be  adopted  as  the  act 


460  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

of  the  Assembly.  I  am  in  favor  of  the  American 
Board.  I  am  a  member,  and  have  confidence  in  it.  I 
am  willing  to  recommend  it,  and  invite  its  committee 
to  send  their  agents  into  our  bounds,  whenever  the 
churches  are  willing  to  receive  them.  But  I  am  not 
willing  that  the  Assembly  should  thus  bind  themselves 
and  their  successors  for  ever,  from  acting  by  themselves. 
Suppose  the  charter  members,  who  all  reside  in  Massa- 
chusetts, should  hereafter  fall  into  great  errors,  in  re- 
gard to  the  manner  of  conducting  missions;  or,  into 
fundamental  errors  of  doctrine. — I  have  no  suspicion 
of  the  kind.  But  we  have  no  security  that  such  a  thing 
will  never  take  place.  And  is  this  supreme  judicatory 
of  the  Presbyterian  Church  to  be  so  committed,  that  it 
cannot  withdraw  the  control  of  its  foreign  missions 
from  such  a  Board  V' 

The  resolutions  were  rejected,  and  it  was  resolved, 
"  that  while  the  Assembly  would  express  no  opinion  in 
relation  to  the  principles  contained  in  the  report,  they 
cordially  recommend  the  American  Board  of  Commis- 
sioners for  Foreign  Missions  to  the  affection  and  patron- 
age of  our  churches." 

Whilst  the  Board  was  thus  strongly  endorsed,  the 
Western  Society  was  no  otherwise  recognized  than  by  a 
sentence  in  the  Narrative,  in  which  "the  Assembly  hail, 
with  pleasure,  the  appearance  of  a  deeper  interest  in  the 
subject  of  Foreign  Missions,  recently  manifested  in  the 
churches  of  the  West,  by  the  establishment  of  a  Western 
Foreign  Missionary  Society.  We  would  that  all  our 
chur.ches  might  have  a  strong  sense  of  their  obligation 
to  send  the  gospel  to  every  creature,  and  afford  fairer 


THE   WESTERN   FOREIGN   MISSIONARY  SOCIETY.     461 

evidence  of  the  sincerity  of  their  daily  prayer,  ^  Thy 
kingdom  come/^' 

But,  although  the  AVestern  Society  shared  so  little  in 
the  favor  of  the  majority  of  the  Assembly,  it  enjoyed 
the  smiles  of  the  Head  of  the  Church,  and  the  growing 
confidence  and  support  of  his  people.  When  its  third 
annual  meeting  was  held,  in  May,  1835,  it  had  already 
established  missions  in  Western  Africa,  in  Northern 
India,  and  among  the  Wea,  Iowa,  ai>d  Omaha  Indians. 
The  Synod  of  Philadelphia  had  united  with  that  of 
Pittsburgh,  in  its  control.  It  had  about  twenty  mis- 
sionaries under  its  care,  and  was  well  sustained  by  the 
contributions  of  the  churches. 

By  the  Assembly  in  session  in  Pittsburgh,  in  that 
year,  a  committee  Avas  appointed  to  confer  with  the 
Synod  of  Pittsburgh,  on  the  transfer  of  the  society  to 
the  care  of  the  General  Assembly ;  and  to  devise  and 
digest  a  plan  for  conducting  Foreign  Missions.  By  a 
subsequent  resolution,  the  committee  was  authorized, 
should  the 'terms  of  the  transfer  be  approved  by  them, 
"  to  ratify  and  confirm  the  same  with  the  Synod,  and 
report  the  same  to  the  next  General  Assembly." 

Under  this  commission,  the  committee  proposed  to 
the  Synod,  at  its  next  stated  meeting,  certain  "Terms 
of  Agreement,"  in  reference  to  the  transfer,  which  were 
accepted  and  ratified  by  the  Synod,  and  reported  accord- 
ingly to  the  Assembly  of  1836. 
39  * 


CHAPTER    XXX. 

DISCIPLINE    ATTEMPTED. 

The  Act  and  Testimony  proposed  a  resort  to  discipline — DuflSeld's 
case — His  book  examined  and  condemned — Proceedings  against 
him — Dr.  Beechei-'s  accession  to  the  Church — Opposition  of  Dr.  J. 
L.  Wilson — He  tables  charges — Dilatory  course  of  Presbytery — 
Decisions  in  Presbytery  and  Synod — Appeal  to  the  Assembly — 
Illinois  College  planned  and  organized  at  New  Haven — The  case 
of  Edward  Beecher,  Sturdevant  and  Kirby. 

The  signers  of  the  Act  and  Testimony,  therein  cove- 
nanted with  each  other,  respecting  disseminators  of 
doctrinal  errors,  to  ^^  make  every  lawful  effort  to  subject 
all  such  persons,  especially  if  they  be  ministers,  to  the 
just  exercise  of  discipline,  by  the  proper  tribunal.'^  In 
accordance  with  this  announcement,  several  prosecu- 
tions took  place,  resulting  in  a  demonstration  of  the 
futility  of  expecting  to  restore  an  extensively  corrupted 
Church,  by  means  of  personal  process  against  indi- 
viduals. In  every  instance,  the  whole  party  at  once 
made  common  cause  with  the  accused.  Every  art  of 
party  management  was  brought  into  requisition,  to  con- 
fuse and  embarrass  the  proceedings,  to  weary  out  the 
prosecution,  to  create  side  issues,  and  distract  the  public 
attention  from  the  real  questions ;  to  prevent  calm  and 
candid  investigation,  and  secure  the  immunity  of  the 
accused.     And  the  success  of  these  measures  demon- 

462 


DISCIPLINE  ATTEMPTED.  463 

strated,  beyond  question,  that  the  signers  of  the  Act 
and  Testimony  did  not  exaggerate  the  extent  of  the 
danger, — that  the  evil  was  already  beyond  correction  by 
the  ordinary  remedies  of  the  Constitution.  ^ 

Already,  before  the  Act  and  Testimony  was  written, 
the  case  of  the  Rev.  George  Duffield  had  been  tried 
before  the  Presbytery  of  Carlisle.  This  gentleman 
published,  in  1831,  an  octavo  volume,  of  613  pages,  on 
^'  Spiritual  Life,  or  Regeneration."  The  dedication  ten- 
dered the  work  to  the  people  of  his  charge,  "  as  an 
atonement  for  occasional  attempts,  in  the  early  periods 
of  his  ministry  among  them,  to  explain  the  great  fact 
of  a  sinner's  regeneration,  by  the  aid  of  a  philosophy, 
imbibed  in  his  theological  education,  interwoven  in 
many  of  his  exhibitions  of  scriptural  truth ;  but  for 
years  past  repudiated,  by  their  much-attached  pastor." 
The  philosophy  and  explanations  thus  repudiated,  were 
those  of  the  Westminster  standards ;  as  the  author  dis- 
tinctly indicates  in  the  course  of  his  discussions. 

It  being  a  common  fame  that  the  book  contained 
grave  doctrinal  errors,  the  Presbytery  of  Carlisle,  in 
1832,  appointed  a  committee  to  examine  it.  This 
committee  made  report,  "at  an  adjourned  meeting,  held 
on  the  27th  and  28th  of  June,  setting  forth  the  errors 
of  the  book. 

The  errors  enumerated  were  twelve  in  number,  meta- 
physical and  theological :  1 .  As  to  the  nature  of  life ; 
that  it  "  consists  in  the  regular  series  of  relative,  appro- 
priate, characteristic,  action,  in  an  individual  being."* 
2.  That  the  soul   is    produced   ex  traduGe,^  from   the 

*  Tlie  quotations  are  fx-om  Daffield,  as  cited  by  the  committee, 
f  By  generation. 


464  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

parents.  3.  That  the  image  of  God  in  which  man  was 
created  consists,  principally,  in  his  threefold  life,  vege- 
table, animal,  and  spiritual.  4.  That  Adam  was  related] 
to  his  posterity,  as  parent,  only.  5.  That  the  death  of 
infants  is  not  penal.  6.  That  depravity  consists,  exclu- 
sively, in  the  acts  and  exercises  of  the  will.  7.  That 
infants  have  no  moral  character.  8.  That  the  inability 
of  sinners  is  wholly  of  the  will.  9.  That  regeneration 
consists  in  a  voluntary  act  of  the  will,  under  the  influ- 
ence of  moral  suasion,  in  which  the  soul  is  active,  not 
passive.  10.  That,  by  election,  the  Scriptures  mean 
nothing  *  else  than  the  actual  conversion  of  men  to 
God.  11.  The  human  nature  of  Christ  possessed  no 
personal,  characteristic  holiness,  irrespective  of  and 
previous  to  his  moral  acts  and  exercises.  12.  The 
author  speaks  unguardedly  and  erroneously  on  being 
filled  with  the  Holy  Spirit. — "  We  have  seen  already," 
he  remarks,  ^^tliat  ideas  of  personal  inhabitation, 
of  infused  grace,  and  of  any  mystic  agency  of  the 
Spirit,  form  no  part  of  the  scriptural  doctrine  of  his 
influence." 

Of  these  opinions,  the  first  was  designed  to  consti- 
tute a  psychological  basis  for  the  doctrinal  scheme 
which  follows.  The  enumeration,  among  doctrinal 
errors,  of  the  traducean  theory,  as  to  the  origin  of  the 
soul,  was  certainly  an  indiscretion ;  as  that  doctrine 
has  been  held,  from  the  days  of  Tertullian  and  Augus- 
tine, by  many  of  the  ablest  and  most  orthodox  men 
who  have  blessed  the  Church.  Says  Turrettin,  "  not  a 
few  of  the  old  divines  believed  it,  and  Augustine  him- 
self, more  than  once,  seems  to  incline  to  it.     And  it  is 


DISCIPLIXE   ATTEMPTED.  465 

not  to  be  questioned,  that  its  admission  relieves  the 
subject  of  original  sin  of  every  difficulty."* 

The  Presbytery  adopted  the  report,  and  warned  all 
her  ministers,  elders,  and  people  against  the  errors  of 
the  book.  It,  also,  appointed  Messrs.  Williams  and 
Wilson  a  committee,  "  to  confer  with  Mr.  Duffield,  in  a 
friendly  manner,  respecting  the  erroneous  doctrines  con- 
tained in  his  book." 

Mr.  Dnffield  had  protested  against  the  committee  of 
examination,  as  unconstitutional.  Upon  the  same 
ground,  he  refused  to  take  any  part  in  the  discussion 
of  the  report.  He  and  Mr.  Dewitt  complained  to  the 
Synod  of  Philadelphia,  against  these  entire  proceedings. 

In  Synod,  it  was  decided,  that  as  the  principal  com- 
plaint of  Mr.  Duffield,  and  that  on  which  the  other  two 
rest,  and  from  which  they  spring,  is  "  that  without  the 
preferring  of  charges,  citation,  and  other  steps  of  judi- 
cial process,  the  Presbytery  have  in  fact  condemned 
him,  as  heretical,"  and  the  Synod  are  distinctly  in- 
formed, that  the  Presbytery  intend,  as  soon  as  practi- 
cable, to  commence  and  issue  such  process,  therefore, 

"  Resolved,  That  further  progress  in  the  present  com- 
plaint is  unnecessary,  if  not  improper,  until  the  Pres- 
bytery shall  have  brought  the  contemplated  trial  of 
Mr.  Duffield  to  an  issue;  which  they  are  hereby  en- 
joined to  do  as  soon  as  possible." 

Accordingly,  the  Presbytery,  on  the  20th  of  October, 
appointed  a  committee,  which,  on  the  28th  of  Novem- 
ber, reported  a  list  of  charges,  identical  with  those  pre- 

*  Turrettin  IX.,  xii.  6.  My  late  friend  and  instructor,  the  Rev. 
Dr.  James  Wood,  author  of  "  Old  and  New  Theology,"  fii-mly  held 
the  traducean  view. 


466  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

viouslj  made  against  the  book,  except  that  the  twelfth 
was  omitted,  and  the  eleventh  combined  with  the  sev- 
enth. The  case  came  on  for  trial,  on  the  11th  of 
April,  1833. 

Thursday,  Friday,  Saturday,  and  the  forenoon  of 
Monday  were  expended  by  Mr.  Duffield  in  pleas  to  the 
competence  of  the  Presbytery,  and  of  members  of  it,  to 
the  sufficiency  of  the  charges,  denying  the  existence  of 
common  fame,  and  so  on.  Particular  emphasis  was 
laid  upon  the  fact  that  the  charges  did  not  write  the 
name,  ^^  heresy, ^^  against  the  errors  charged.  Upon  j 
various  points,  he  entered  Protests,  Complaints,  and 
Appeals. 

Presbytery,  at  length,  proceeded  to  hear  the  charges 
and  evidence,  the  prosecuting  committee,  and  Mr.  Duf- 
field ;  whereupon,  the  vote  was  taken,  and  the  charges 
were  sustained,  except  the  third  and  tenth,  which  were 
rejected. 

It  was  then  resolved  that,  "  as  to  the  counts,  in  which 
Mr.  Duffield  has  been  found  guilty.  Presbytery  judge 
that  Mr.  Duffield's  book,  and  sermons  on  Regeneration, 
do  contain  the  s|)ecified  errors,  yet  as  Mr.  Duffield  alleges 
that  Presbytery  have  misinterpreted  some  of  his  expres- 
sions, and  says  he  does  in  fact,  hold  all  the  doctrines  of 
our  standards,  and  that  he  wishes  to  live  in  amity  with 
his  brethren,  and  labor  without  interference,  for  the 
glory  of  God  and  the  salvation  of  souls,  therefore, 

"  Resolved^  That  Presbytery,  at  present,  do  not  cen- 
sure him,  any  further  than  warn  him  to  guard  against 
such  speculations  as  may  impugn  the  doctrines  of  our 
Church  ;  and  that  he  study  to  maintain  the  unity  of  the 
Spirit,  in  the  bonds  of  peace." 


DISCIPLINE   ATTEMPTED.  467 

Against  this  decision,  Mr.  Duffield  gave  notice  of  an 
appeal  to  the  General  Assembly ;  which,  however,  he 
did  not  prosecute.  Under  the  name  of  an  appeal,  how- 
ever, he  published  an  elaborate  document,  in  which, 
taking  up  the  charges,  one  by  one,  he  tried  to  show 
that  he  had  not  maintained  or  propagated  opinions  or 
doctrines,  at  variance  with  the  Confession  of  Faith. 

"When  these  proceedings  came  before  the  Synod  of 
Philadelphia,  in  review,  in  October,  1833,  action  was 
postponed,  in  consequence  of  the  sickness  and  absence 
of  ]\Ir.  Duffield.  The  next  year,  it  was  taken  up,  and 
a  minute  adopted,  censuring  the  leniency  of  the  Presby- 
tery. And  so  ended  the  case.  Light  has  been  recently 
shed  upon  it  by  the  exposition  made  by  Dr.  Duffield, 
of  the  "  Doctrines  of  the  New  School  Presbyterians,^' 
in  the  Bibliotheca  Sacra  for  July,  1863.*  The  reader 
who  will  compare  the  charges,  of  which  the  Doctor 
was  convicted,  with  the  article  in  that  quarterly,  will 
see  that  the  doctrinal  system,  involved  in  those  charges, 
is  precisely  that,  in  all  its  essential  features,  which  he 
describes  with  approbation  as  the  theology  of  the  New 
School. 

We  have  already  seen  something  of  the  theological 
position  and  relations  of  Dr.  Lyman  Beecher.  In  1832, 
upon  the  nomination  of  Arthur  Tappan,  Esq.,  as  the 
condition  of  a  gift  of  $25,000  to  the  Lane  Seminary, 
he  was  chosen  to  the  presidency  of  that  institution ;  to 
which,  none  but  ministers  of  the  Presbyterian  Church 
were  eligible.  Whilst  he  was  holding  this  appointment 
in  consideration,  the  Rev.  James  Weatherby,  of  Missis- 
sippi, visited  New  England,  as  delegate  from  the  Gen- 
*  See,  also,  Princeton  Eeview,  1867,  p.  655, 


468  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

eral  Assembly  to  the  General  Association  of  Connecti- 
cut. Dr.  Beecher  sought  an  interview,  in  the  course  of 
which  he  informed  Mr.  Weatherby  of  the  appointment, 
and  expressed  'some  doubt  of  being  able  to  come  up  to 
the  requirement  as  to  Presbyterianism.  Mr.  Weather- 
by  told  him  that  any  doubts  on  that  subject  admitted  of 
easy  solution.  If  he  could,  with  a  good  conscience,  an- 
swer affirmatively,  the  questions  put  to  candidates  for 
the  ministry,  he  was  a  Presbyterian.  Dr.  Beecher,  at 
once,  brought  a  Confession,  and  placing  it  in  the  hands 
of  Mr.  Weatherby,  requested  him  to  propound  the 
questions.  This  he  did,  and  received  affirmative  answers, 
to  all  except  the  second,  "  Do  you  sincerely  receive  and 
adopt  the  Confession  of  Faith  of  this  Church,  as  con- 
taining the  system  of  doctrine  taught  in  the  Holy 
Scriptures  ?"  The  reply  was,  ^^  Yes,  but  I  will  not  say 
how  much  more  it  contains."  Mr.  Weatherby  closed 
the  book,  saying  that  he  was  no  Presbyterian.  After 
some  conversation  on  the  subject,  the  process  was,  at  the 
request  of  Dr.  Beecher,  repeated ;  but  with  the  same  re- 
sult. Again  the  subject  was  discussed,  Mr.  Weatherby 
remarking  that  no  such  Yankee  answer  would  do. — • 
That  it  was  idle  for  Dr.  Beecher  to  pretend  to  be  a 
Presbyterian.  Finally,  the  Doctor  proposed  a  third 
trial ;  when  he  passed  successfully  through  the  ordeal, 
giving  the  answer  in  simple  affirmative.*  He,  soon 
after,  wrote  to  the  Third  Presbytery  of  New  York,  de- 
claring his  affirmative  answer  to  those  questions, — was 
thereupon  received  as  a  member, — and,  immediately,  at 

*  MS.  memorandum,  from  the  late  Mr.  Weatherby,  dated  May  13, 
1853.  Mr.  Weatherby  stated  these  facts  to  the  writer,  and,  by  request, 
gave  him  a  written  note  of  them. 


DISCIPLINE   ATTEMPTED.  469 

his  own  request,  dismissed  to  join  the  Presbytery  of 
Cincinnati. 

Such  was  the  ddbut  of  this  distinguished  leader,  in 
the  Presbyterian  Church.  At  the  time  of  his  arrival  in 
Cincinnati,  that  Presbytery  had  been  for  some  time  suf- 
fering distraction,  from  the  success  of  the  policy  of  Dr. 
Peters,  by  which  it  was  filling  with  New  School  men, 
and  being  pervaded  with  New  School  doctrines,  meas- 
ures, and  policy.  Dr.  Beecher  had  been  selected  as  the 
leader  of  this  party,  and  was,  at  once,  recognized  in  that 
office.  "  I  have  been  chosen  and  come,'^  said  he  to  a 
distinguished  gentleman,  then  connected  with  a  literary 
institution  in  that  region,  "  to  make  the  West  what 
New  England  is ;  and  I  can  do  it.  I  have  pledge  of 
the  co-operation  of  such  and  such  eminent  men ;  and  I 
want  you  to  help  me." 

When  he  was  admitted  into  the  Presbytery  of  Cincin- 
nati, upon  dismission  from  the  Third  Presbytery  of 
New  York,  Dr.  J.  L.  Wilson  offered  a  protest,  which 
was  refused  a  place  on  the  record,  on  the  ground  that 
he  was  moderator,  and  not  entitled  to  vote,  and,  there- 
fore, had  no  right  to  protest. 

A  motion  was,  thereupon,  made,  for  a  committee  to 
inquire  as  to  a  common  fame  charging  the  Doctor  with 
doctrinal  error.  This  motion  was  rejected.  A  similar 
motion  was  made,  in  April,  1833,  postponed  until  the 
fall,  and,  then,  indefinitely  postponed.  Against  this 
conclusion,  complaint  was  made  to  the  Synod ;  which 
decided,  that  Presbytery  could  not  be  compelled  to  pro- 
ceed, judicially,  unless  a  responsible  prosecutor  ap- 
peared. Appeal  was  taken  to  the  Assembly  of  1834, 
which  threw  it  out  on  technical  grounds. 

40 


470  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

At  length,  in  November,  1834,  Dr.  Wilson  presented 
himself  at  the  bar  of  Presbytery,  and  tabled  charges 
against  Dr.  Beecher,  under  four  general  heads  and  nu- 
merous specifications.  These  exhibited  the  New  School 
theories,  as.  to  man^s  native  depravity,  ability,  and  the 
work  of  the  Holy  Spirit  in  regeneration.  They  further 
charged  the  Doctor  with  teaching  a  doctrine  of  perfec- 
tion, contrary  to  the  standards, — with  slander,  in  bely- 
ing the  whole  Church  of  God,  by  representing  these  as 
being  its  accepted  doctrines, — and  with  hypocrisy  and 
dissimulation,  in  professing  attachment  to  the  Confession 
of  Faith. 

Upon  the  presentation  of  these  charges,  the  Presby- 
tery entered  them  on  record,  but  postponed  the  considera- 
tion of  the  subject,  till  the  next  stated  meeting, — from 
the  11th  of  November,  1834,  till  the  10th  of  April, 
1835.  At  that  time,  it  ordered  the  citation  of  the  wit- 
nesses, warned  the  prosecutor,  solemnly  constituted  as  a 
judicial  tribunal  of  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ ;  and  then — 
adjourned  for  two  months,  till  the  9th  of  June !  At  the 
June  meeting,  the  case  was  at  length,  taken  up  and 
issued.  The  discussion  was  protracted  through  more 
than  a  week,  and  resulted  in  the  acquittal  of  the 
accused,  and,  a  reference  to  the  Synod  of  Cincinnati, 
to  decide  what  censure  should  be  inflicted  on  the  prose- 
cutor. Against  this  decision,  Dr.  Wilson  took  an 
appeal. 

Before  the  Synod,  such  explanations  and  statements 
were  made  by  Dr.  Beecher  as  satisfied  the  majority  of 
that  body.  It  however  decided,  that  the  appeal  be 
sustained;  1st.  Because  there  was  no  reason  to  censure 
Dr.  Wilson.     2d.  ^'Because,  although  the  charges  of 


I 


DISCIPLINE   ATTEMPTED.  471 

slander  and  hypocrisy  are  not  proved ;  and  although 
Synod  see  nothing  in  his  views,  as  explained  by  himself 
to  justify  any  suspicion  of  unsoundness  in  the  faith  ; 
yet,  on  the  subject  of  the  depraved  nature  of  man,  and 
total  depravity,  and  the  work  of  the  Holy  Spirit  in 
effectual  calling,  and  the  subject  of  ability,  they  are  of 
the  opinion  that  Dr.  Beecher  has  indulged  a  disposition 
to  philosophize,  instead  of  exhibiting,  in  simplicity  and 
plainness,  the  doctrines  as  taught  in  the  Scriptures  ;  and 
has  employed  terms  and  phrases,  and  modes  of  illustra- 
tion, calculated  to  convey  ideas  inconsistent  with  the 
Word  of  God,  and  our  Confession  of  Faith  ;  and  that 
he  ought  to  be,  and  hereby  is,  admonished  to  be  more 
guarded  in  the  future." 

Dr.  Beecher  declared  his  ready  acquiescence  in  this 
decision  of  the  Synod ;  which,  thereupon,  expressed  its 
satisfaction,  and  advised  him  to  publish,  "  at  as  early  a 
day  as  possible,  in  pamphlet  form,  a  concise  statement 
of  the  argument  and  design  of  his  sermon  on  native 
ability,  and  of  his  views  of  total  depravity,  original 
sin,  and  regeneration,  agreeably  to  his  declarations  and 
explanations,  made  before  Synod." 

Dr.  Wilson  appealed  to  the  Assembly.  When,  how- 
ever, the  case  came  before  that  body,  in  1836,  he  was 
induced  by  the  advice  of  brethren,  to  waive  the  prosecu- 
tion ;  as  Barnes'  case  was  then  pending,  the  decision 
upon  which,  it  was  hoped,  would  determine  the  ques- 
tions involved  in  this. 

In  response  to  the  advice  of  Synod,  Dr.  Beecher  pub- 
lished,— not  a  concise  pamphlet  statement,  as  recom- 
mended,— but  a  volume  of  "Views  on  Theology,"  a 
work  comparatively  orthodox. 


472  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

That  Dr.  Beecher  had  held  and  taught  the  leading 
points  of  New  School  theology,  is  unquestionable.  And, 
that  there  is  an  irreconcilable  diiference  between  his 
various  statements  on  the  subject,  is  equally  certain, — a 
difference  to  be  accounted  for,  perhaps,  to  a  great  extent, 
by  the  idiosyncrasies  of  an  intellect,  intensely  active, 
but  capricious,  illogical,  and,  seemingly,  almost  devoid 
of  memory. 

About  the  time  of  Dr.  Beecher's  removal  to  Ohio, 
there  existed  in  Yale  Seminary  an  association  of  young 
men  whose  attention  was  turned  to  the  West,  with 
a  view  to  the  same  object  which  brought  him  to  Cin- 
cinnati. They  originated  the  plan  of  Illinois  College, 
and  organized  themselves  into  a  board  of  trustees,  be- 
fore they  had  ever  seen  Illinois.  As  fast  as  the  asso- 
ciates entered  the  ministry,  they  removed  to  that  State, 
united  with  the  Presbyterian  Church,  and  located  around 
the  institution,  which  with  the  Rev.  Edward  Beecher,  late 
a  tutor  in  Yale,  at  its  head,  they  destined  to  be  the  Yale 
of  tlie  West.  Dr.  Taylor  and  the  other  divines  of  New 
Haven  were  the  counselors  of  the  enterprise;  the 
American  Education  and  Home  Missionary  Societies 
afforded  all  the  requisite  means;  and  the  Avealth  of  New 
England  was  freely  bestowed  upon  an  enterpi-ise  so  full 
of  promise. 

In  1833,  the  Rev.  Wm.  J.  Eraser  tabled  charges, 
before  the  Presbytery  of  Illinois,  against  President 
Beecher,  and  the  Rev.  Professors  J.  M.  Sturdevant, 
and  William  Kirby,  for  teaching  erroneous  doctrines. 
The  witnesses  relied  upon  were  mostly  students  of 
the   college.      After   considerable    progress   had    been 


DISCIPLINE    ATTEMPTED.  473 

made,  in  taking  testimony,  the  accused  proposed,  as 
a  substitute  for  all  testimony,  a  statement  of  their  faith, 
in  writing.  This  the  prosecutor  accepted.  It  v/as  as 
follows : — 

"  We  believe  and  teach,  that  the  sinner  has  power  to 
make  himself  a  new  heiirt,  without  the  influence  of  the 
Holy  Spirit ;  but,  that  such  is  his  voluntary  aversion 
to  his  duty,  that  he  never  will  do  it,  without  those 
influences ;  and  that,  of  course,  he  is  dependent  on  them 
for  salvation. 

"  That  the  nature  of  sin  is  such,  that  no  man  can 
become  a  sinner,  except  by  his  own  act ;  and  yet,  that 
all  men  sin,  in  all  their  moral  conduct,  from  the  com- 
mencement of  their  moral  agency ;  and  that  the  reason 
of  this  fact  is  to  be  found  in  the  original  fall  of  the 
human  race. 

"We  believe  and  teach,  that  God,  foreseeing  from  all 
eternity  that  such  would  be  the  character  and  condition 
of  men,  determined  to  interpose,  for  the  salvation  of  a 
certain  part  of  the  human  race,  and  to  make  them  will- 
ing to  do  their  duty ;  not  from  any  foreseen  good  in 
them,  as  the  exciting  cause  of  his  conduct,  but  from  a 
regard  to  his  own  glory  and  the  general  good.  That 
those  whom  he  does  not  thus  -  interpose  to  save,  are  left 
to  deserved  ruin,  as  the  natural  result  and  just  punish- 
ment of  their  own  voluntary  depravity;  but  we  do 
believe,  that  if  men  were  the  subjects  of  an  absolute 
inability  to  obey  the  law  of  God,  or  accept  the  offers  of 
the  gospel,  such  that  nothing  but  the  influences  of  the 
Spirit  of  God  could  give  them  ability,  it  would  then  be 
tyrannical  in  God,  to  withhold  from  a  certain  portion 
of  the  human  race  those  influences,  and  yet  damn  them 

40  * 


474  HISTOEY  OF  THE  NEW  SCHOOL. 

to  all  eternity,  for  not  obeying  his  law,  or  accepting  his 

gospel. 

E.  Beechee, 

J.  M.  Stuedevant, 

Wm.  Kieby." 

Upon  this  profession  of  faith,  the  Presbytery,  after 
protracted  discussion,  decided  that  "  The  accused  breth- 
ren do  not  teach  doctrines,  materially  or  essentially,  at 
variance  with  the  standards  of  the  Presbyterian  Church 
and  the  Word  of  God.^'  Mr,  Fraser  appealed  to  the 
Synod.  But  he  was  induced  to  drop  it,  in  the  expecta- 
tion that  the  other  cases  then  pending  would  lead  to  a 
settlement  by  the  Assembly,  of  the  questions  involved. 


*■ 


»*• 


CHAPTER    XXXI. 

BARNES^     SECOND     TRIAL. 

Charges  entered  before  the  Assembly's  Presbytery — The  charges — 
Action  of  Presbytery — Jurisdiction  of  Synod  denied — Action  of 
the  Synod,  and  suspension  of  Mr.  Barnes — Tlie  principle  of  his 
defence — His  explanations — New  School  identified  with  him — 
The  decision — Protests,  and  Eeply — It  attested  Mr.  Barnes'  ortho- 
doxy— The  evidence — Assembly's  professed  devotion  to  the  Confes- 
sion— Old  School  distrust — Parody  on  the  New  England  Primer. 

The  case  toward  which  all  eyes  now  turned,  and  on 
the  decision  of  which  all  the  interests  of  orthodoxy 
seemed,  for  the  time,  to  hang  suspended,  was  the  second 
trial  of  Mr.  Barnes.  The  prosecutor  was  the  Rev.  Dr. 
George  Junkin.  The  charges  were  based  upon  the 
doctrines  contained  in  Barnes'  Notes  on  the  Romans, 
which  had  just  issued  from  the  press.  They  were 
entered  before  the  Assembly's  Second  Presbytery,  on 
the  23d  of  March,  1835;  and  the  prosecutor  entertained 
the  hope  and  expectation  that  the  trial  would  be  issued, 
with  a  reasonable  promptitude,  so  as  to  enable  him  to 
carry  the  case  at  once  to  the  Assembly  of  1835 ;  and  thus 
secure  a  decision  of  the  vital  questions  involved,  with 
as  little  delay  and  consequent  agitation  of  the  Church 
as  possible.  Such,  however,  was  not  the  policy  of  Mr. 
Barnes  and  the  Presbytery.  From  the  entering  of  the 
charges,  until  the  30th  of  June,  more  than  three  months, 

475 


476  HISTORY  OF  THE  NEW  SCHOOL. 

the  time  was  consumed  by  the  Presbytery  in  evasive 
measures,  designed  to  avoid  altogether  a  trial  of  the 
case.  At  length,  when,  apparently,  every  such  resource 
had  failed,  the  latter  date  was  set  for  the  trial.  At  the 
appointed  time,  the  Presbytery  met.  The  parties  were 
present  and  ready  to  proceed.  But  a  new  evasion  had 
been  discovered.  The  charges  were  in  the  following 
terms  ; — 

"  The  Rev.  Albert  Barnes  is  hereby  charged  with 
maintaining  the  following  doctrines,  contrary  to  the 
standards  of  the  Presbyterian  Church.  1.  That  sin 
consists  in  voluntary  action.  2.  That  Adam,  (before 
and  after  his  fall,)  was  ignorant  of  his  moral  relations 
to  such  a  degree,  that  he  did  not  know  the  consequences 
of  his  sin  would  or  should  reach  any  further,  than  to 
natural  death.  3.  That  unregenerate  men  are  able  to  keep 
the  commandments,  and  convert  themselves  to  God. 
4.  That  faith  is  an  act  of  the  mind  and  not  a  principle, 
and  is  itself  imputed  for  righteousness. 

*'  Mr.  Barnes  is  also  charged  with  denying  the  follow- 
ing doctrines,  which  are  taught  in  the  standards  of  the 
Church,  viz. :  5.  That  God  entered  into  covenant  with 
Adam,  constituting  him  a  federal  or  covenant  head, 
and  representative  to  all  his  natural  descendants.  6. 
That  the  first  sin  of  Adam  is  imputed  to  his  posterity. 
7.  That  mankind  are  guilty,  ^.  e.,  liable  to  punishment 
on  account  of  the  sin  of  Adam.  8.  That  Christ  suf- 
fered the  proper  penalty  of  the  law,  as  the  vicarious 
substitute  of  his  people,  and  thus  took  away  legally 
their  sins,  and  purchased  pardon.  9.  That  the  right- 
eousness, i.  e.y  the  active  obedience  of  Christ  to  the  law, 
is  imputed  to  his  people  for  their  justification;  so  that 


BARNES'  SECOND    TRIAL.  477 

';hey  are  righteous  in  the  eye  of  the  law,  and  therefore 
['justified.  10.  Mr.  Barnes  also  teaches,  in  opposition  to 
i:he  standards,  that  justification  is  simply  pardon." 
I  In  all  this  the  word,  heresy,  is  not  to  be  found. 
Presbytery,  therefore,  after  deliberation,  assumed  that 
no  offence  was  charged,  in  the  accusation,  as  it  stood ; 
knd  resolved  to  allow  the  prosecutor  to  Avithdraw  his 
charges,  for  the  purposes  of  emendation,  or,  otherwise, 
Presbytery  would  not  proceed  to  the  trial.  This  Dr. 
Junkin  refused  to  do ;  and  was  about  to  retire ;  when 
further  reflection  convinced  the  Presbytery  that  it  would 
be  utterly  impossible  to  defend  the  position  which  it 
had  taken.  The  action  was  reconsidered,  and  Dr.  Jun- 
kin allowed  to  proceed.  The  trial  lasted  for  a  week, 
and  resulted,  according  to  expectation,  in  the  acquittal 
of  Mr.  Barnes ;  only  the  Rev.  Mr.  (now  Dr.)  Board- 
man,  and    Elders    Bradford  and   Stille   voting   in  the 

negative. 

Dr.  Junkin  now  proposed  to  appeal  directly  to  the 
General  Assembly.  To  this,  however,  Mr.  Barnes 
strongly  objected.  Dr.  Junkin,  therefore,  waived  this 
intention,  and  inquired  whether  the  appeal  could  go  to 
the  Synod  of  Delaware,— would  it  ever  meet  again? 
To  this  inquiry  several  voices  responded, — ''No,  it 
can't  meet,— Its  time  of  meeting  is  after  the  time  to 
which  the  Synod  of  Philadelphia  stands  adjourned; 
and,  of  course,  it  cannot  meet."  "  Then,"  said  the  Dr., 
"the  appeal  must  be  to  the  Synod  of  Philadelphia." 
In  this  view,  all  tacitly  concui-red ;  and  to  that  Synod, 
the  appeal  was  taken. 

The  Synod  met,  in  York,  on  Wednesday,  the  28th 
of  October.     On  Thursday,  the  appeal  of  Dr.  Junkin 


478  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

was  reported,  and  the  Synod  resolved  to  issue  it.  The 
next  morning,  Dr.  Ely  presented  a  minute,  which  had 
been  adopted  by  the  Assembly's  Presbytery,  the  day 
before : — 

"  Whereas,  the  General  Assembly  of  our  Church  dis- 
solved the  Synod  of  Delaware,  at  and  after  the  meeting 
of  the  Synod  of  Philadelphia,  which  occurred  yester- 
day ;  whereas,  the  said  Assembly  passed  no  order  for 
the  transfer  of  the  books,  minutes,  and  unfinished  busi- 
ness of  the  Synod  of  Delaware  and  of  the  Presbyteries 
then  belonging  to  the  same,  to  any  other  Synod  or  judi- 
catory ;  and  whereas,  it  is  utterly  inconsistent  with  rea- 
son and  the  excellent  standards  of  our  Church,  that 
any  Presbytery  should  be  amenable  to  more  than  one 
Synod,  at  the  same  time,  therefore,  resolved.  That  the 
Presbytery  will,  and  hereby  does  decline  to  submit  its 
books,  records,  and  proceedings,  prior  to  this  date,  to 
the  review  and  control  of  the  Synod  of  Philadelphia, 
until  the  General  Assembly  shall  take  some  order  on 
the  subject.'^ 

Rev.  Dr.  John  Breckinridge  asked  Dr.  Ely  if  he  did 
not  draft  the  minute  of  the  Assembly,  and  suggest  the 
plan  therein  proposed ;  and  now,  if  there  was  a  trap  in 
it,  was  it  not  strange  that  he,  the  author  of  it,  should 
plead  it  against  the  Synod  ? 

Dr.  Ely  replied  that  he  did  draft  the  original  minute ; 
but  the  Assembly  did  not  order  the  Presbytery  to  put 
the  records  into  the  hands  of  this  Synod.  He  was 
thankful  that  a  slip  had  been  permitted  in  the  legisla- 
tion. Dr.  Miller  had  amended  his  minute ;  and  thus 
"  in  the  providence  of  God,  they  had  been  permitted, 
in  their  very  anxiety  to  secure  their  end,  to  do  that 


BARNES^  SECOND   TRIAL.  479 

which  protects  the  Assembly's  Second  Presbytery  in 
their  rights." 

The  use  here  made  of  Dr.  Miller's  amendment,  was 

ivery  extraordinary.  It  must  be  admitted  that  the 
amendment, — taken  by  itself,  without  respect  to  the 
circumstances,  and  the  unquestionable   design   of    the 

Assembly,  —  did  give  some  color  of  ground' for  the 
position  now  taken  by  Dr.  Ely  and  the  Presbytery. 
It  was,  however,  entirely  neutralized  by  the  well- 
understood  and  unquestioned  design  of  the  Assembly, — 

jia  design  invested  with  all  the  sacredness  of  a  solemn 
coveuant  of  peace.  The  interpretation  now  adopted 
was,  further,  forbidden  by  the  anomalous  and  uncon- 

istitLitional  attitude,  in  which  it  would  have  placed  the 

I  Presbyteries  concerned,  subject  to  no  synodical  super- 
vision, whatever,  for  the  year  which  was  now  closed. 

jIn  fact,  that  interpretation  seems  to  have  been  a  mere 
afterthought,  which  occurred  to  some  one,  a  day  or  two 
before  it  was  plead  at  the  bar  of  Synod. 

The  attitude  assumed  by  the  Presbytery  was,  the 
more  extraordinary,  as  Mr.  Barnes  himself  did  not  pre- 
tend to  deny  the  jurisdiction  of  Synod;  professed  to  be 
ready  for  the  trial  of  the  appeal ;  and  yet  sheltered 
himself  behind  this  action  of  his  Presbytery,  and  re- 
fused to  plead,  unless  the  official  records  of  the  Presby- 
tery were  obtained ;  although,  he  was  well  aware  that 
authentic  copies  were  before  the  Synod. 

The  attitude  of  the  Presbytery  and  of  Mr.  Barnes 
was  not  permitted  to  arrest  the  proceedings,  in  the 
Synod.  Dr.  Junkin  produced  and  authenticated  a  copy 
of  all  the  evidence  and  of  the  judgment  of  Presbytery. 
The  Synod,  therelipon,  proceeded  to  try  the  appeal,  not- 


480  HISTORY   OF   THE    NEW   SCHOOL. 

withstanding  the  refusal  of  Mr.  Barnes  to  plead.  Five 
days  were  spent  in  the  hearing,  when  the  vote  was 
taken,  the  appeal  sustained,  and  Mr.  Barnes  found  guilty 
of  errors,  some  of  them  fundamental,  and  all  contrary 
the  doctrines  of  the  standards  and  Word  of  God.  He 
was  suspended  from  the  ministry,  ^'  until  he  shall  retract 
the  errors  hereby  condemned,  and  give  satisfactory  evi- 
dence of  repentance." 

Against  this  decision,  Mr.  Barnes  took  an  appeal  to 
the  General  Assembly.  It  came  up  early  in  the  ses- 
sions of  the  Assembly  of  1836.  Constitutionally,  this 
appeal  could  not  lie;  as  Mr.  Barnes  had  not  submitted 
to  trial.  But  this  was  not  regarded.  The  case  occu- 
pied the  most  of  nine  days  of  the  sessions.  The  gene- 
ral principle  on  which  Mr.  Barnes  based  his  vindica- 
tion, is  thus  stated,  in  his  published  "  Defence." — 

"  Of  the  Confession  of  Faith  of  the  Westminster 
Assembly,  I  may  be  allowed  to  say,  that  when  I  ex- 
pressed my  assent  to  it,  as  ^a  system  of  doctrines,'  I 
did  it  cordially ;  and  that  I  have  never  had  occasion  to 
regret  the  act.  I  then  regarded  it,  as  I  do  now,  and 
ever  have  done,  as  the  best  summary  of  the  doctrines 

of  the  Bible  which  I  have  seen The  system  of 

timtli  contained  there,  as  distinguished  from  all  other 
systems, — the  Socinian,  the  Pelagian,  the  Arian,  the 
Arminian,  etc.,  has  appeared  to  me  the  true  system; 
and  without  hesitation  or  fluctuation,  I  have  received  it. 
I  have  not  forgotten,  however,  that  nearly  two  hundred 
years  have  elapsed,  since  it  was  formed ;  that  language 
often  varies  its  meaning;  and  that  views  of  philosophy, 
which  insensibly  insinuate  themselves  into  theology, 
seldom  continue  the  same  two  hundred  years.     I  have 


BARNES'  SECOND   TRIAL.  481 

thought  that  there  was  perhaps,  somewhat  too  much 
harshness  and  severity  of  language  in  the  general  cast 
of  the  Confession ;  and  that  a  few  expressions  do  not 
convey,  without  much  labored  exposition,  the  meaning 
of  the  Scriptures.  To  a  few  of  those  expressions,  small 
in  number,  and  not  affecting  the  system  as  a  system,  I 
have  always  taken  the  exceptions  which  others  have 
been  allowed  to  do.""*" 

In  the  course  of  the  proceedings,  on  the  appeal,  there 
appeared,  at  one  time,  to  be  a  prospect  of  amicable  ad- 
justment of  the  whole  matter.  So  ample  seemed  the 
explanations  of  Mr.  Barnes ;  so  full  the  retractions 
which  he  was  understood  to  make,  and  so  hearty  appa- 
rently, his  acceptance  of  the  teachings  of  the  Confession, 
on  the  questions  at  issue,  that  Dr.  Junkin  was  induced, 
to  say  to  the  Assembly, — "  If  the  concessions  which  we 
heard  yesterday  can  be  put  in  a  form  that  is  satisfactory, 
I  shall  be  willing  to  take  a  course  that  will  save  the 
time  of  this  Assembly."  Had  Mr.  Barnes  been  willing 
to  put  upon  record  the  acknowledgments  which  he  had 
made,  on  the  floor,  the  case  would  there  have  ended, 
and  the  peace  and  unity  of  the  Church  might  possibly 
have  been  preserved.  This  fair  prospect  was,  however, 
quickly  closed,  by  the  announcement  of  Mr.  Barnes  that 
he  had  not  retracted  anything  ;  and  that  he  never  would. 

In  the  discussion  which  followed  the  hearing  of  the 
parties,  the  attitude  assumed  by  the  New  School  leaders 
was  as  arbitrary  and  uncompromising  as  was  that  of  Mr. 
Barnes.  While  some  of  the  members  affected  to  see  no 
irreconcilable  difference  between  the  sentiments  of  Mr. 
Barnes  and  the  doctrines  of  the  standards,  others  recog- 

*  Barnes'  Defence,  p.  111. 
41, 


482  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

nized  and  openly  gloried  in  the  difference,  only  com- 
plaining that  Mr.  Barnes  was  too  orthodox.  The  body 
of  the  New  School  made  Mr.  Barnes'  case  their  own, 
and  avowed  that  with  him  they  must  stand  or  fall.  Dr. 
Peters,  their  unquestioned  leader,  took  the  position  that 
Mr.  Barnes  was  not  merely  to  be  tolerated,  but  entitled 
to  all  confidence  and  honor.  Dr.  Skinner  avowed  that 
he  was  himself  on  trial,  in  the  person  of  Mr.  Barnes, 
and  was  unwilling  that  ^'  the  slightest  censure"  should 
be  inflicted  on  him.  And,  said  Dr.  Peters, — '^  I  honor 
the  design  of  preparing  a  doctrinal  book  that  shall  be 
divested  of  technical  language  and  hard  names ;  and  I 
not  only  adhere  to  the  doctrines,  but  for  the  most  part, 
to  the  very  language  of  Mr.  Barnes'  book."*  In  his 
estimation,  not  Mr.  Barnes,  but  Dr.  Junkin,  if  any 
one,  must  be  held  dependent  upon  the  toleration  of  his 
brethren ;    since    he   denied    the    doctrine   of   natui'al 

abilitv.t 

On  the  final  question,  the  appeal  was  sustained,  by  a 
vote  of  134  to  96  ;  six  declining  to  vote  ;  the  Synod  of 
Philadelphia  being,  of  course,  out  of  the  house.  The 
suspension  of  Mr.  Barnes  was  then  reversed,  by  a  vote 
of  145  to  78  ;  eleven  declining  to  vote. 
■  Dr.  Miller  then  offered  a  resolution  pronouncing  the 
judgment  of  the  Assembly,  that  some  of  Mr.  Barnes' 
published  opinions  are  materially  at  variance  with  the 
Confession  of  Faith  and  the  Bible,  ^'  especially  with  re- 
gard to  original  sin,  the  relation  of  man  to  Adam,  and 
justification  by  faith  in  the  atoning  sacrifice  and  riglit- 
eousness  of  the  Redeemer ; "  censuring  the  manner  in 

*  Quoted  in  his  anonymous  Plea  for  Voluntary  Societies,  p.  143. 
t  Ibid.  p.  141. 


Barnes'  second  trial.  483 

which  he  had  controverted  the  language  and  doctrines 
of  the  Confession ;  and  admonishing  him  to  review  his 
work,  on  the  Romans,  and  to  rectify  its  objectionable 
statements ;  and  "  to  be  more  careful,  in  time  to  come, 
to  study  the  purity  and  peace  of  the  Church.'' 

This  resolution  was  rejected  by  a  vote  of  109  to  122 ; 
three  declining  to  vote. 

Two  protests  were  entered,  against  the  decisions  of 
the  Assembly,  in  Mr.  Barnes'  case.  One  of  these  was 
signed  by  one  hundred  and  one  members,  and  the  other, 
by  sixteen ;  all  of  whom,  but  two  were  signers  of  the 
first.  To  these  protests,  a  reply  was  adopted,  which 
was,  perhaps,  the  most  extraordinary  feature  of  the 
whole  case.  It  was  reported  by  a  committee  consisting 
of  the  Rev.  Drs.  Skinner  and  Allen,  and  the  Kev.  Mr. 
Brainard.  Dr.  Beecher  was  understood  to  have  had  a 
principal  hand  in  its  preparation.  Mr.  Duffield  seconded 
Dr.  Skinner's  motion  for  its  adoption;  and  it  would 
seem  to  have  received  the  unanimous  vote  of  the  New 
School  majority  of  the  Assembly.  In  this  paper,  the 
Assembly  declared  that  the  phraseology  of  Mr.  Barnes 
had  not  been  always  sufficiently  guarded,  but  that,  even 
in  the  first  edition  of  his  Notes  on  the  Romans,  "  the 
language  is,  without  violence  reconcilable  with  an  in- 
terpretation conformable  to  our  standards  ;"  much  more, 
therefore,  the  revised  edition,  in  the  light  of  "  all  his  dis- 
claimers before  the  Assembly,  and  all  his  definite  and 
unequivocal  declarations  of  the  true  intent  and  mean- 
ing of  his  words,  in  the  first  edition." 

To  substantiate  this  position  the  reply  proceeded  to 
give  "  a  careful  analysis  of  the  real  meaning  of  Mr. 
Barnes,  under  each  charge,  as  ascertained  by  the  Ian- 


484  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW  SCHOOL. 

guage  of  his  book  and  the  revisions,  disclaimers, 
explanations  and  declarations  which  he  had  made." 
For  example,  it  asserts  that  "  Mr.  Barnes  nowhere  de- 
nies, much  less,  ^  sneers'  at,  the  idea  that  Adam  was  the 
covenant  and  federal  head  of  his  posterity.  On  the 
contrary,  though  he  employs  not  these  terms,  he  does, 
in  other  language,  teach  the  same  truths  which  are 
taught  by  the  phraseology." 

But  Dr.  Junkin's  charge  was,  that  Mr.  Barnes  denied 
Adam  to  be  the  federal  head  and  representative  of  his 
natural  posterity;  and,  among  the  proofs  cited  from 
tlie  book,  were  the  following : — "  Nothing  is  said  here, 
[Romans  v.  19]  of  the  doctrine  of  representation.  It 
is  not  affirmed  that  Adam  was  the  representative  of  his 
race,  nor  is  that  lano-uaore  used  in  reo;ard  to  him  in  the 
Bible.  (2.)  Nothing  is  said  of  a  covenant  with  him. 
Nowhere  in  the  Scriptures  is  the  term  covenant  applied 
to  any  transaction  with  Adam.  (3.)  All  that  is  estab- 
lished, here,  is  the  simple  fad,  that  Adam  sinned,  and 
that  this  made  it  certain  that  all  his  posterity  would  be 
sinners.  Beyond  this,  the  language  of  the  apostle  does 
not  2:0 :  and  all  else  that  has  been  said  of  this  is  the  re- 

suit  of  mere  philosophical   speculation Various 

attempts  have  been  made  to  explain  this.  The  most 
common  has  been,  that  Adam  was  the  representative  of 
the  race ;  that  he  was  a  covenant  head,  and  that  his  sin 
was  imputed  to  liis  posterity,  and  that  they  were  held 
liable  to  punishment  for  it,  as  if  they  had  committed  it 
themselves.  But,  to  this,  there  are  great  and  insuper- 
able objections.  (1.)  There  is  not  one  word  of  it  in  the 
Bible.  Neither  the  terms,  representative,  covenant,  nor, 
impute,  are  efcer  applied  to  the  transaction,  in  the  sacred 


BARNES'  SECOND   TRIAL.  485 

Scriptures.  (2.)  It  is  a  mere  philosophical  theory  ;  an 
introduction  of  a  speculation  into  theology,  with  an  at- 
tempt to  explain  what  the  Bible  has  left  unexplained."* 
Again : — "  A  comparison  is  also  instituted  between 
Adam  and  Christ,  in  1  Cor.  xv.  22,  45.  The  reason  is, 
not  that  Adam  was  the  representative  or  federal  head  of 
the  race;  about  which  the  apostle  says  nothing,  and 
which  is  not  even  implied,  but  that  he  was  the  first  of 
the  race ;  he  was  the  fountain ;  the  head,  the  father ; 
and  the  consequences  of  that  first  act  introducing  sin 
into  the  world,  could  be  seen  everywhere.  The  words 
repi'esentativej  and  federal  Jiead,  are  never  applied  to 
Adam,  in  the  Bible.  The  reason  is,  that  the  word  rep- 
resentative implies  an  idea  which  could  not  have  existed 
in  the  case, — the  consent  of  those  who  are  represented. 
Besides,  the  Bible  does  not  teach  that  they  acted  in  him, 
or  by  him  ;  or  that  he  acted  for  them.  No  passage  has 
ever  yet  been  found  that  stated  this  doctrine."t 

On  Romans  v.  12,  he  says: — Paul  "was  inquiring 
into  the  cause  why  death  was  in  the  world;  and  it 
would  not  account  for  that  to  say  that  all  sinned  in 
Adam.  It  would  require  an  additional  statement  to  see 
how  that  could  be  a  cause.  The  expression  '  in  whom 
all  have  sinned'  conveys  no  intelligible  idea.  As  men 
had  no  existence  then,  in  any  sense,  they  could  not  then 
sin.  What  idea  is  conveyed  to  men  of  common  under- 
standing, by  the  expression,  'they  sinned  in  him'?" 
This  looks  not  unlike  a  sneer. 

It  was  in  the  presence  of  such  language  as  this,  cited 
by  Dr.  Junkin,  from  Mr.  Barnes,  that  tlie  majority  of 
the  Assembly  entered  it  upon  record,  that  he  "  nowhere 

*  Barnes  on  the  Romans,  1st  edition,  p.  128.     f  Ibid.,  p.  120. 
41* 


486  HISTORY   OF   THE  NEW   SCHOOL. 

denies,  much  less  sneers  at,  the  idea  that  Adam  was  the 
covenant  and  federal-head  of  his  posterity ; "  that  in 
fact,  he  teaches  the  same  truths,  in  other  language  ! 
How  were  the  prosecutor  and  the  Church  to  understand 
this  assertion,  so  plainly  contrary  to  truth,  and  to  the 
evidence  staring  them  in  the  face  ? 

As  remarkable  as  the  assertion  of  Mr.  Barnes'  ortho- 
doxy, was  the  statement  of  the  reply,  as  to  the  doctrinal 
views  of  those  who  were  pronouncing  his  acquittal. 
^^  So  far,"  said  they,  ^'  is  the  Assembly  from  countenan- 
cing the  errors  alleged  in  the  charges  of  Dr.  Junkin,  that 
they  do,  cordially,  and  ex  animo^  adopt  the  Confession 
of  our  Church,  on  the  points  of  doctrine  in  question, 
according  to  the  obvious  and  most  j>revalent  interpreta- 
tion ;  and  do  regard  it,  as  a  whole,  as  the  best  epitome 
of  the  doctrines  of  the  Bible  ever  formed.  And  this 
Assembly  disavows  any  desire,  and  would  deprecate 
any  attempt  to  change  the  phraseology  of  our  standards, 
and  would  disapprove  any  language  of  light  estimation 
applied  to  them ;  believing  that  no  denomination  can 
prosper  whose  members  permit  themselves  to  speak 
slightly  of  its  formularies  of  doctrine ; — and  are  ready 
to  unite  with  their  brethren  in  contending  earnestly  for 
the  faith  of  our  standards.'^ 

What  meant  this  remarkable  statement  ?  Had  Drs. 
Skinner,  Duffield,  and  their  associates  been  suddenly 
converted  into  the  soundest  of  Old  School  men  ?  Did 
the  phrase — '^  the  obvious  and  most  prevalent  interpre- 
tation,''— contain  a  hidden  meaning?  Or,  must  the 
Old  School  conclude  that  the  leaders  of  the  Assembly 
began  to  find,  or  to  fear,  that  they  were  drawing  too 

*  From  the  heart. 


BARNES'  SECOND   TRIAL.  487 

heavily  upon  the  good  nature  of  their  Moderate  allies, — 
that  the  avowals,  which  had  been  so  boldly  made,  in 
the  discussion  of  Barnes'  case,  were  in  danger  of  alien- 
ating them,  and  of  opening  the  eyes  of  the  people? 
Was  it  thus,  that  a  necessity  arose  for  such  a  testimony 
of  reverence  for  the  Confession  ?  and  w^as  that  testi- 
mony to  be  understood,  not  as  expressing  the  private 
sentiments  of  individual  leaders  of  the  party,  but  what 
they  knew  to  be  those  of  "  the  Assembly,'' — that  is,  of 
the  majority  of  the  members,  all  parties  included? 
Such  were  the  questions  which  forced  themselves  into 
notice,  in  view  of  all  the  facts  connected  with  the  case. 
Whatever  its  meaning, — so  earnest  a  protestation  of 
orthodoxy,  coming  from  such  a  quarter,  and  in  such 
circumstances, — entirely  failed  to  conciliate  the  confi- 
dence, or  quiet  the  alarms  of  the  minority.  They  read 
this  declaration,  in  immediate  connection  with  the 
incredible  assertion  that  IVIr.  Barnes'  contradictions  were 
in  perfect  harmony  wdth  the  doctrines  of  the  standards. 
They  could  not  but  reflect  upon  the  avowals  of  indiffer- 
ence to  the  authority  of  the  Confession,  and  rejection 
of  its  teachings,  which  they  had  heard  so  freely  uttered, 
during  the  discussion  of  the  appeal.  They  remembered 
the  written  avowals  of  Messrs.  Edward  Beecher,  Stur- 
devant,  and  Kirby,  when  on  trial,  and  the  finding  of 
their  Presbytery  thereupon.  They  remembered  the 
writings  of  Beman  and  Cox  and  Duflield,  and  many 
others.  In  the  light  of  such  facts  and  recollections  it 
was  impossible  for  them  to  believe  that  the  history  of  a 
quarter  of  a  century  of  controversy  and  rebuke,  in 
defence  <>f  the  doctrines  of  the  gospel,  was  all  an  unreal 
figment  of  the  imagination,  a  troubled  dream.    Nothing 


488  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW  SCHOOL. 

in  the  whole  history  so  shocked  the  conscience  of  the 
Church,  or  so  prepared  it  for  the  action  of  1837,  as  did 
this  attempt  to  cover  the  doctrinal  derelictions  of  Mr, 
Barnes  and  the'  party. 

The  real  sentiments  of  this  Assembly  were  more 
truly  illustrated  by  an  anecdote  which  was  related  by 
Mr.  Finney,  when,  subsequently,  his  cordial  relations 
with  the  New  School  had  been  terminated,  by  his  ad- 
vance to  perfectionism.  Whilst,  in  the  progress  of  the 
trial,  the  subject  of  original  sin  was  under  discussion, 
one  of  the  New  School  doctors  penciled  a  couplet  on  a 
card.  It  was  passed,  in  succession,  to  three  others,  each 
of  whom  added  a  line ;  so  that,  when  the  circle  was 
completed,  it  read  thus  : — 

"  In  Adam's  fall,  We  sinned  all. 
In  Abel's  murder,  We  sinned  fiirder. 
In  Tubal  Cain,  We  sinned  again. 
In  Doctor  Green,  Our  sin  is  seen." 

Mr.  Finney  states  that  "  the  above  occurrence  was  a 
matter  of  common  talk,  among  the  New  School  mem- 
bers of  the  Assembly,  at  the  time ;  and  not  an  indi- 
vidual, so  far  as  was  heard,  expressed  his  disapproval 
of  it." 

Whatever  else,  however,  was  still  doubtful,  one  thing 
was  now  apparent.  Discipline,  as  a  means  of  vindicat- 
ing the  doctrines  of  the  standards,  against  the  incoming 
flood  of  error,  had  been  fully  tried,  and  utterly  fliiled. 
The  disease  was  too  inveterate  and  pervasive  for  that 
remedy. 


CHAPTER    XXXII. 

THE    ASSEMBLY    OF    1836. 

New  School  majority — Eeport  respecting  the  Western  Foreign  Mis- 
sionary Society — Dr.  Skinner's  resolution — Letters  from  one  of  the 
Secretaries  of  A.  B.  C.  F.  M — Discussion  in  the  Assembly — The 
Society  rejected — Attempts  to  revolutionize  the  Boards  of  Missions 
and  Education — Board  of  Education's  report  mutilated — Appeals  of 
the  elective  affinity  and  Wilmington  Presbyteries — Newark  Church 
— McKim's  case — The  Presbyteries  restored — Evening  conferences 
of  the  two  parties. 

We  have  seen  the  action  of  the  Assembly  of  1836, 
in  the  case  of  Mr.  Barnes.  When  that  body  met,  the 
election  of  Dr.  Witherspoon,  as  ISIoclerator,  over  Dr. 
Peters,  the  New  School  nominee,  seemed  to  indicate  the 
presence  of  an  Old  School  majority.  But  the  arrival 
of  a  steamer,  crowded  with  commissioners  from  Illinois 
and  Missouri,  turned  the  scale,  and  gave  the  New  School 
party  the  absolute  control.  In  fact,  the  majority  of  the 
body  was  the  offspring  of  the  Plan  of  Union,  and  the 
American  Home  INIissionary  Society.  Of  this,  the  vote 
on  the  acquittal  of  Mr.  Barnes  was  an  illustration.  Of 
the  majority  on  that  vote,  sixty-three  were  from  Western 
New  York  and  the  Western  Reserve,  and  the  larger 
part  of  the  rest  Avere  the  employds  and  friends  of  the 
Home  Society,  in  Illinois,  Missouri,  and  elsewhere. 

Beside  the  case  of  Mr.  Barnes,  the  most  important 

489 


490  HISTORY  OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

business  that  came  before  the  Assembly,  was  the  report 
of  the  committee  appointed  to  negotiate  the  transfer  of 
the  Western  Foreign  Missionary  Society.  The  com- 
mittee reported  that  they  had  proposed  certain  terms  of 
agreement,  to  the  Synod  of  Pittsburgh,  which  had  been 
duly  ratified  by  that  body.  These  terms  provided  that 
"  the  General  Assembly  will  assume  the  supervision 
and  control  of  the  Western  Foreign  Missionary  Society, 
from  and  after  the  next  annual  meeting  of  said  Assem- 
bly, and  will  thereafter  superintend  and  conduct,  by  its 
own  proper  authority,  the  work  of  Foreign  Missions  of 
the  Presbyterian  Church,  by  a  Board  especially  ap- 
pointed for  that  purpose,  and  directly  amenable  to  said 
Assembly.  And  the  Synod  of  Pittsburgh  does  hereby 
transfer  to  that  body,  all  its  supervision  and  control 
over  the  mission's  and  operations  of  the  Western  Foreign 
Society,  from  and  after  the  adoption  of  this  minute ; 
and  authorizes  and  directs  said  Society  to  perform 
every  act  necessary  to  complete  said  transfer,  when  the 
Assembly  shall  have  appointed  its  Board; — it  being 
expressly  understood  that  the  said  Assembly  will  never 
hereafter  alienate  or  transfer  to  any  other  judicatory  or 
Board  whatever,  the  direct  supervision  and  manage- 
ment of  the  said  missions,  or  those  which  may  hereafter 
be  established  by  the  Board  of  the  General  Assei»bly.'^ 

The  terms  of  agreement  further  embodied  a  plan  of 
organization  for  the  Board  of  Foreign  Missions  of  the 
Assembly. 

After  some  discussion,  this  report  was  referred  to  a 
committee  of  five,  with  instruction  ^^  to  review  the 
whole  case,  and  present  it  for  the  consideration  of  the 
Assembly." 


THE   ASSEMBLY   OF    1836.  491 

In  the  report  of  this  committee,  after  a  review  of  the 
history,  they  state  it,  as  the  conclusion,  from  the  whole, 
that  "  the  Assembly  have  entered  into  a  solemn  com- 
pact with  the  Synod  of  Pittsburgh,  and  that  there  re- 
mains but  one  righteous  course  to  pursue ;  which  is,  to 
adopt  the  report  of  the  committee  appointed  last  year, 
and  to  appoint  a  foreign  missionary  Board.  To  pause 
now,  or  to  annul  the  doings  of  the  last  Assembly,  in 
this  matter,  would  be  obviously  a  violation  of  contract, — 
a  breach  of  trust, — and  a  departure  from  that  good 
faith,  which  should  be  sacredly  kept  betw^een  man  and 
man,  and  especially  between  Christian  societies, — con- 
duct which  would  be  utterly  unworthy  of  this  venera- 
ble body,  and  highly  injurious  to  the  Western  Foreign 
Missionary  Society/' 

As  a  minority  of  the  committee,  the  Rev.  Dr.  Skin- 
ner made  a  counter  report,  that, — ^'  Whereas,  the 
American  Board  of  Commissioners  for  Foreign  Missions 
has  been  connected  with  the  Presbyterian  Church  from 
the  year  of  its  incorporation,  by  the  very  elements  of 
its  existence; — and,  whereas,  at  the  present  time,  the 
majority  of  the  whole  of  that  Board  are  Presbyterians ; 
and  whereas  it  is  undesirable,  in  conducting  the  work  of 
foreign  missions,  that  there  should  be  any  collision  at 
home  or  abroad ;  therefore, 

''  Pesolved,  That  it  is  inexpedient  that  the  Assembly 
should  organize  a  separate  foreign  missionary  institu- 
tion." 

Not  only  was  this  proposition  strongly  in  the  interest 
of  the  American  Board.  The  argument  came  from  the 
office  in  Boston.  Pending  the  negotiations  with  the 
Synod   of  Pittsburgh,   by  the   Assembly's  committee, 


492  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

there  issued  from  the  press  a  twelvemo  pamphlet  of 
24  pages,  entitled,  "  Letters  on  the  Constitution  of  the 
American  Board  of  Commissioners  for  Foreign  Mis- 
sions. Addressed  to  the  Kev.  Dr.  Abeel,  of  the  Re- 
formed Dutch  Church,  by  one  of  the  Secretaries  of  the 
^oard.'^  Of  these  letters,  Dr.  Rufus  Anderson  was  the 
writer.  They  proposed  to  give  an  exposition  of  the 
title  of  that  Board  to  the  confidence  and  support  of  the 
Presbyterian,  Congregational,  and  Reformed  Dutch 
Churches. 

^'  The  American  Board,"  says  the  writer,  ''  had  an 
ecclesiastical  origin,  and  had  its  first  existence,  as  did 
the  foreign  missionary  enterprise,  in  this  country,  among 

the  Congregational  churches  of  New  England 

Its  patrons,  however,  have  never  been  confined  to  that 
denomination,  nor  to  New  England ;  although  the 
United  Foreign  Missionary  Society  was  formed  with 
express  reference  to  the  Presbyterian,  Reformed  Dutch 
and  Associate  Reformed  Churches,  as  early  as  the  year 
1818.  This  society  was  amalgamated  with  the  Board, 
in  the  year  1826,  at  its  own  request.  In  the  same  year, 
according  to  the  terms  agreed  upon  for  the  amalgama- 
tion, the  General  Assembly  of  the  Presbyterian  Church 
and  the  General  Synod  of  the  Reformed  Dutch  Church 
gave  the  Board  their  official  sanction  and  recommenda- 
tion. In  1831,  the  General  Assembly  appointed  com- 
missioners to  confer  with  the  Board,  relative  to  the 
measures  best  adapted  to  enlist  the  energies  of  the 
Presbyterian  Church  more  extensively  in  the  cause  of 
missions  to  the  heathen ;  Avho  met  and  conferred  with 
the  Board,  in  the  autumn  of  the  same  year.  These 
commissioners  reported  to  the  General  Assembly,  that 


THE   ASSEMBLY   OF    1836.  493 

in  their  judgment,  the  Board  was  a  national  institution, 
belonging  as  much  to  one  section  of  the  country  as  to 
another;''  etc.  After  recapitulating  the  argument  of 
that  committee  against  the  erection  of  any  other  mis- 
sionary organization ;  and  in  favor  of  united  and  Rigor- 
ous support  of  the  Board ;  and  mentioning  a  similar 
report  made  to  the  Reformed  Dutch  Church,  the  Secre- 
tary proceeds  : — 

"  Such,  in  brief,  is  the  manner  in  which  the  Board 
has  acquired  its  official  relations  to  the  general  ecdesiaS'- 
j  tical  bodies  of  the  Presbyterian,  Reformed  Dutch  and 
Congregational  Churches."  That  is  to  say, — by  an 
amalgamation,  which  both  the  General  Assembly  and 
the  Reformed  Dutch  Synod  expressly  refused  to  approve, 
and  the  terms  of  which  they  formally  rejected  ;  although 
the  Secretary  intimates  that  they  were  adopted  and  ful- 
filled ;  and  by  a  report,  prepared  jointly  by  the  Assem- 
bly's committee  and  the  Secretaries  of  the  Board,  the 
arguments  and  conclusions  of  which  the  Assembly, 
also,  refused  to  sanction ;  a  fact  which  the  Secretary, 
for  some  reason,  neglects  to  mention. 

The  Secretary  then  proceeds  to  the  statement  to  which 
Dr.  Skinner  was  indebted  for  his  preamble : — •"  There 
is,  however,  another,  and  highly  important  view  of  its 
relations  to  these  churches.  The  Board  has  been  con- 
nected with  the  Presbyterian  Church,  from  the  year  of 
its  incorporation,  by  the  very  elements  of  its  existence. 
The  members  originally  incorporated  were  in  number 
eleven.  These,  immediately  after  receiving  the  act  of 
incorporation,  elected  thirteen  others,  eight  of  whom 
were  from  among  the  most  distinguished  members  of 
the   Presbyterian   Church.     The   Board  now  became, 

42 


494  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

by  its  very  nature,   connected    with    the    Presbyterian 

Church Now,  the  Board  is  to  be  regarded  as 

being,  in  fact  and  in  eifect,  what  its  corporate  members 
are.  Of  these,  there  are  eighty-three;  and  forty-four 
are  Pjresbyterians,  thirty-one  are  Congregationalists,  and 
seven  belong  to  the  Reformed  Dutch  Church.'' 

The  reader  understands  that,  in  the  selection  of  these 
numerous  Presbyterian  members  of  the  Board,  the 
Church  was  not  consulted ;  that  many  of  them  were 
Presbyterian  only  in  name ;  and  that  they  were  scat- 
tered from  New  England  to  Georgia,  in  accordance  with 
a  policy  admirably  adapted  to  secure  the  confidence  and 
contributions  of  the  people;  but  which  did  not  even 
purport  to  give  the  organized  Church  any  authority  or 
voice,  even,  in  the  management  of  her  missions;  whilst 
the  members,  thus  accredited  to  her,  and  thus  scattered 
abroad,  were  certain  never  to  meet  with  the  Board  in 
such  numbers  as  to  supersede  or  endanger  the  control 
exercised  by  the  Congregational  members,  who  were 
clustered  around  the  seat  of  operations,  in  Boston.  The 
subsequent  experience  of  our  New  School  and  Reformed 
Dutch  brethren  has  shed  light  on  this  subject. 

The  Letters  of  the  Secretary  were  published  in  the 
winter  of  1835-6,  and  the  time  and  circumstances,  the 
diligence  with  which  they  were  circulated,  and  the  cold- 
ness which  the  officers  of  the  Western  Society  realized 
from  those  of  the  American  Board,  demonstrated  that 
the  Western  movement  was  looked  upon  with  displeas- 
ure and  apprehension,  in  the  office  at  Boston;  and  that 
the  American  Board  still  clung  to  the  hope  of  acquir- 
ing the  undivided  control  of  the  missions  of  the  Pres- 
byterian Church. 


THE   ASSEMBLY   OF    1836.  495 

On  the  discussion  of  the  subject  in  the  Assembly,  the 
entrance  of  the  Church,  in  her  organized  capacity,  upon 
the  work  of  Foreign  Missions  was  opposed,  upon  various 
grounds.  It  was  denied  that  the  Assembly  had  authority 
to  organize  a  Board,  or  engage  in  this  work.  It  has 
never  received  any  such  authority  from  the  Presbyteries. 
The  commission  to  send  the  gospel  to  every  creature 
belongs  to  the  Church  universal,  which  is  an  unorgan- 
ized body,  and  is,  therefore,  of  no  avail,  as  proof  of  the 
authority  or  duty  of  the  Assembly,  in  the  case.  True, 
the  Constitution  does  state  that  the  General  Assembly 
may,  '^  of  its  own  knowledge,  send  missions  to  any  part, 
to  plant  churches,  or  supply  vacancies."*  But,  '•'■  Here, 
there  is  no  provision  for  the  appointment  of  a  per- 
manent Board,  for  this  purpose.  The  missions  must 
be  sent,  by  the  Assembly,  of  their  own  hioioledge.  This 
can  be  done  only  while  the  Assembly  is  in  session.  To 
direct  a  permanent  Board  to  act  with  the  knowledge,  as 
well  as  power  of  the  Assembly,  would  be  for  the  Assem- 
bly to  perpetuate  itself,  after  its  own  dissolution ;  which 
is  absurd.  And  the  Assembly  cannot  delegate  the  powder 
of  acting,  .of  their  own  knowledge,  to  any  Board.     It 

is  impossible."t 

The  organizing  of  a  Foreign  Board  Avas  opposed, 
because  the  gospel  is  not  sectarian,  and  should  not  be  so 
exhibited  to  the  heathen ;  and  because  two  organiza- 
tions operating  in  the  same  cause  would  be  sure  to  come 
into  collision. 

The  obligation  to  accept  the  Western  Society  was 
denied,  upon  the  ground  that  the  last  Assembly  had 

*  Form  of  Government,  ch.  xviii. 

f  Peters'  Plea  for  Voluntary  Societies,  p.  80. 


i 


496  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

not  the  power  to  enter  into  a  contract  binding  its  suc- 
cessor ;  and  should  not  have  done  it,  if  it  had  possessed 
the  power.  Yet,  at  the  same  time,  it  was  asserted  by 
the  speaker.  Dr.  Peters,  that  the  Assembly  was  bound 
to  the  American  Board,  by  the  treaty  of  amalgamation 
of  1826.  A  rejected  treaty  was  held  strong  enough  to 
bind  the  Assembly  to  abstain  from  the  missionary  work. 
But  a  treaty  actually  consummated  was  of  no  force, 
since  it  required  the  Church  to  engage  in  that  work. 

Special  objection  was  urged  against  the  proviso  con- 
tained in  the  terms,  prohibiting  the  alienation  of  the 
missions, — a  condition  suggested  by  the  past  impressive 
experience  of  the  Synod  of  Pittsburgh  and  its  missions. 

The  arguments  of  the  nationality,  the  catholicity, 
and  the  Presbyterianism  of  the  American  Board,  as 
embodied  in  the  Letters  of  Dr.  Anderson,  were  all 
exhausted,  in  demonstration  that  it,  and  it  only  should 
receive  the  confidence  and  support  of  the  Presbyterian 
Church. 

On  the  other  hand,  the  right  and  duty  of  the  organ- 
ized Church  to  take  charge  of  this  great  business, — the 
anxious  hope  with  which  many  of  her  people  were 
looking  to  her  to  enter  upon  it, — and  the  duty  of  fidelity 
to  the  obligations  of  covenant  made  with  the  Synod  of 
Pittsburgh,  were  urged  in  vain. 

The  question  was  called,  and,  by  a  vote  of  110  to 
106,  the  Assembly  refused  to  fulfill  the  covenant,  or 
enter  upon  the  work.  A  protest  against  this  decision, 
penned  by  Dr.  Miller  and  signed  by  eighty-two  mem- 
bers of  the  Assembly,  was  entered,  with  a  reply,  drafted 
by  Dr.  Peters. 

Coincident  with  the  rejection  of  the  Western  Foreign 


THE  ASSEMBLY  OF   1836.  497 

Missionary  Society,  was  an  attempt  to  revolutionize  the 
Boards  of  Domestic  Missions  and  Education.  For  the 
former  Board,  a  ticket  was  nominated,  composed  of  such 
names  as  Dr.  Skinner,  and  Messrs.  Duffield,  Patterson, 
Eddy,  and  Adair;  men  than  whom  there  were  none 
more  hostile  to  the  institutions  of  the  Church,  or  more 
thoroughly  devoted  to  the  Congregational  Societies.  This 
attempt  was  justified  by  Dr.  Peters,  upon  the  ground 
that  there  should  be  but  one  such  institution.  The 
attempt  only  lacked  a  few  votes  of  succeeding.  It  failed 
through  the  defection  of  some  of  the  more  moderate 
men  of  the  party,  who  revolted  at  the  injustice  and  dis- 
honor of  the  course  pursued. 

In  the  Board  of  Education  a  similar  change  was 
attempted,  by  secret  treachery.  It  was  the  rule  of  the 
Assembly,  that  all  nominations  should  be  made  in  open 
Assembly,  and  posted  at  the  door,  a  certain  time  before 
the  election.  The  regular  nominations  had  been  made, 
and  no  opposition  ticket  presented.  But  when  the  time 
of  election  drew  near,  INIr.  Peabody,  the  Secretary  of 
the  Board,  was  accosted  by  a  gentleman,  who  informed 
him,  that  a  secret  ticket  would  be  run,  with  the  expecta- 
tion of  taking  the  friends  of  the  Board  by  surprise,  and 
so  carrying  the  election.  Mr.  Peabody  at  once  took 
such  measures  as  time  permitted,  to  secure  a  full  vote  of 
the  friends  of  the  Board.  The  secret  ticket  received  so 
large  a  vote,  that  the  Board  barely  escaped.  How  such 
measures  were  planned  and  arranged,  will  appear  below. 

In  another  form,  the  hostility  of  the  majority  of  the 
Assembly,  to  the  Board,  and  to  the  distinctive  inter- 
ests of  the  Church,  was  strikingly  evinced.  Dr.  Wil- 
liam Patton,  the  General  Agent  of  the  so-called  Presby- 

42* 


498  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

terian  Education  Society,  and  the  friends  of  that  institu- 
tion, had  been  in  the  habit  of  insisting  upon  the  un- 
necessary expenses  and  other  evils  resulting  from  the 
operation  of  two  similar  institutions,  in  the  same  field. 
They,  also,  took  pains  to  produce  the  impression  that 
the  Society  was  anxious  to  obviate  the  difficulty,  by 
some  plan  of  union  with  the  Board  ;  but,  that  the  latter 
was  so  filled  with  the  spirit  of  a  narrow  sectarianism, 
as  to  discourage  all  overtures  toward  that  end.  Dr. 
Patton,  had,  in  fact,  repeatedly  introduced  the  subject, 
in  personal  interviews  with  officers  of  the  Board.  At 
length  Dr.  Breckinridge,  the  Secretary,  with  the  in- 
formal sanction  of  the  Board,  addressed  a  letter  to  Dr. 
Patton,  in  which  he  referred  to  these  conversations,  and 
disavowed  for  himself  and  the  Board  any  power  to  act 
definitely  on  the  subject.  He  then  proceeded  to  state 
the  terms  on  which  he  had  no  doubt  the  Board  would 
cordially  recommend,  and  the  Assembly  sanction,  a 
union.  These  were, — ecclesiastical  supervision ;  the 
abandonment  of  the  system  of  loans  to  beneficiaries,  se- 
cured by  bonds,  for  the  return  of  the  money  advanced 
to  them ;  and  the  sustaining  of  the  doctrines  and  stand- 
ards of  our  Church.  In  the  annual  report  of  the  Board, 
a  full  account,  of  this  whole  matter  was  embodied,  in- 
cluding Dr.  Breckinridge's  letter  to  Dr.  Patton.  The 
account  closed  by  stating  that  this  letter  ^^  was  written 
in  October  last,  and  although  the  Corresponding  Secre- 
tary of  the  Presbyterian  Education  Society  has  been 
since  waited  on  and  an  answer  requested,  none  has  yet 
been  received.  If,  therefore,  the  rival  action  of  the  two 
Boards  produces  evil  consequences,  to  our  Church,  we 
trust  our  Board  is  not  to  be  held  responsible." 


THE   ASSEMBLY   OF    1836.  499 

It  was  impossible  for  the  Presbyterian  Society  ta 
have  replied  to  Dr.  Breckinridge's  letter,  without  dem- 
onstrating the  a nti- Presbyterian  &pirit  which  controlled 
it,  and  the  falsehood  of  its  Presbyterian  name.  There 
was,  therefore,  no  reply.  And  in  the  same  spirit,  the 
Assembly  ordered  this  Avhole  statement  to  be  erased 
from  the  Report  of  the  Board  ! 

Another  subject  of  consideration  and  action  was  the 
case  of  the  Presbytery  of  Wilmington,  and  the  elective 
affinity  Presbytery  of  Philadelphia.  These  bodies  had 
been  dissolved,  by  the  Synod  of  Philadelphia.  This 
action  was  in  precise  accordance  with  the  express  under- 
standing had,  and  the  instructions  embodied  in  Dr.  Ely's 
compromise  resolution,  for  dissolving  the  Synod  of 
Delaware;  by  means  of  which,  the  Assembly  of  1835 
had  been  cajoled  into  waiving  the  decisive  measures, 
which  it  was  about  to  take,  respecting  those  Presby- 
teries. It  was,  furthermore,  a  step  not  only  justified  by 
the  contumacy  of  those  Presbyteries,  in  refusing  to  pro- 
duce their  records,  upon  the  call  of  Synod,  but  impera- 
tively demanded,  in  order  to  the  peace  of  the  Churches. 
From  its  origin,  as  we  have  already  seen,  the  elective 
affinity  Presbytery  had  maintained  its  growth,  by  in- 
truding into  the  other  Presbyteries,  amidst  whom  it  was 
planted,  invading  and  dividing  their  churches,  and 
creating  constant  distraction  and  disorder. 

The  Presbytery  of  Wilmington,  although  possessed 
of  geographical  boundaries,  had  entered  upon  a  similar 
course  of  action.  On  this  subject,  two  complaints  came 
before  the  Synod,  in  the  fall  of  1835;  one  from  the 
Presbytery  of  New  Castle,  and  the  other  from  that  of 
Carlisle.     In  the  former  case,  it  appeared  that  the  New 


500  HISTORY  OF  THE  NEW  SCHOOL. 

Castle  Presbytery,  having  heard  that  a  committee  of 
the  AVilmington  Presbytery  had  been  appointed  to  or- 
ganize a  church  in  the  village  of  Newark,  within  the 
bounds  of  a  church  under  the  care  of  the  New  Castle 
Presbytery,  the  latter  appointed  a  committee  of  its 
members,  to  be  present  and  remonstrate  against  the  pro- 
posed measure.  In  defiance  of  the  remonstrances  and 
entreaties  of  this  committee,  the  Wilmington  committee 
proceeded  to  organize  a  church  of  nine  members ;  several 
of  whom  had  no  fixed  residence. 

From  the  complaint  of  the  Carlisle  Presbytery  it  ap- 
peared that  INIr.  J.  M.  McKim  had  been  a  candidate 
of  that  Presbytery,  on  trials  for  ordination.  Having 
passed  successfully  certain  parts  of  his  trials,  he  sub- 
mitted a  popular  discourse,  on  2  Cor.  v.  17:  "If  any 
man  be  in  Christ,  he  is  a  new  creature ;"  which,  and 
his  examination  on  systematic  theology,  were  not  sus- 
tained. Presbytery  then  assigned  him  Eph.  ii.  1  :  "  You 
hath  he  quickened,  who  were  dead  in  the  trespasses 
and  sins,"  for  another  sermon ;  and  recommended  him 
"  to  pursue  his  theological  studies  at  some  ^approved 
theological  seminary.^'  He  was  a  pupil  of  Mr.  Duf- 
field. 

At  a  meeting  of  the  Presbytery,  held  a  short  time 
after  this  action,  a  request  was  received  from  Mr. 
McKim,  for  a  dismission  to  place  himself  under  the 
care  of  the  Presbytery  of  Wilmington ;  although  he 
was  living  in  the  centre  of  Carlisle  Presbytery.  This 
request  was  not  granted  ;  but  a  committee  was  appointed 
to  confer  with  Mr.  McKim.  To  this  committee  he  de- 
clared his  purpose  to  submit  himself  to  no  further  trials 
before  that  Presbytery,  and  renewed  his  request  for  a 


THE   ASSEMBLY   OF   1836.  501 

dismission.  This  not  being  granted,  he  was  received, 
11  without  dismission,  by  the  Presbytery  of  Wilmington ; 
although  it  was  fully  informed  of  the  facts  of  the  case. 
He  was  licensed  by  it,  and  appeared  in  Synod,  as  an  or- 
dained member  of  that  Presbytery.  In  the  mean  time, 
he  had  been  habitually  preaching,  by  authority  of  the 
Presbytery  of  Wilmington,  in  the  midst  of  the  Presby- 
tery of  Carlisle,  which  had  refused  to  license  him,  on 
account  of  his  doctrinal  unsoundness. 

Upon  the  trial  of  these  cases  before  the  Synod,  the 
Presbytery  of  Wilmington  refused  to  produce  its  records, 
— taking  the  same  ground  with  the  Philadelphia  Pres- 
bytery, as  to  the  jurisdiction  of  Synod.  The  Synod, 
then,  called  upon  Mr.  McKira,  as  in  a  court  of  con- 
science, to  state  at  what  time  and  place  he  was  ordained. 
It  appeared,  from  his  answer,  that  he  had  been  ordained, 
on  the  morning  on  w^hicli  the  Synod  met,  in  another 
church  in  the  same  village ;  the  Presbytery  thus  treat- 
ing with  contempt  the  pending  complaint,  and  forestall- 
ing the  action  of  the  Synod.  Mr.  McKim,  some  years 
later,  addressed  a  letter  to  the  Presbytery  of  Wilming- 
ton, in  which  he  repudiated  the  doctrine  of  the  atone- 
ment and  other  cardinal  truths  of  the  gospel, — traced 
his  sentiments  to  the  elementary  principles  which  he 
had  learned  from  Mr.  Duffield, — and  abandoned  the 
Presbyterian  Church. 

The  Synod  censured  the  recusant  Presbyteries  for 
contumacy,  in  withholding  their  records.  It  dissolved 
the  church  organized  in  Newark ;  censured  the  conduct 
of  the  Presbytery  with  respect  to  Mr.  McKim,  and 
dissolved  the  two  Presbyteries  of  Wilmington  and 
Philadelphia,     and      appropriately     distributed     their 


502  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

ministers,  churches^  and  other  elements,  to  the  adjacent 
Presbyteries. 

Against  this  action,  the  two  Presbyteries  appealed  to 
the  Assembly ;  and,  in  the  mean  time,  treated  the 
act  of  dissolution  as  a  dead  letter.  Commissioners 
were  sent,  by  the  elective  affinity  Presbytery  of  Phila- 
delphia, to  the  General  Assembly.  They  were  at  once 
enrolled,  and  held  their  seats  undisturbed,  till  the  ad- 
journment of  the  Assembly. 

Upon  the  appeal,  the  Presbyteries  were  restored. 
The  elective  affinity  Presbytery  was  assigned  a  geo- 
graphical territory  and  boundary,  and  its  name  changed 
to  the  Third  Presbytery  of  Philadelphia.  Hitherto  it 
had  held  the  name  of  Second  Presbytery,  in  common 
with  that  erected  by  the  Synod. 

During  the  exciting  and  anxious  sessions  of  this  As- 
sembly, the  Old  School  members  held  one  or  two  meet- 
ings for  consultation,  in  the  Second  Church.  They 
were  convened,  by  public  announcement,  by  the  Mode- 
rator, in  the  Assembly,  inviting  the  presence  of  those 
who  voted  with  the  minority  on  Dr.  Miller's  resolution 
in  Barnes'  case.  Before  the  business  of  the  conference 
had  commenced,  the  youthful  pastor  of  the  church, 
without  consultation,  announced  that  any  who  did  not 
sympathize  with  the  ol^ects  of  the  meeting,  were  re- 
quested to  retire.  This  suggestion  was  at  once  repu- 
diated, by  a  general  cry  of  "  No !  no !"  Dr.  Miller 
emphatically  stating  that  they  had  nothing  to  conceal, 
and  no  wish  that  any  one  should  retire.*  This  sugges- 
tion, which  was  thus,  at  once,  repudiated,  by  acclama- 

*  The  author,  then  a  collegian,  was  present  Avitli  several  young 
friends. 


THE   ASSEMBLY   OF    1836.  503 

tion^  was  made  the  occasion  of  much  invidious  remark 
among  the  New  School  members  of  the  Assembly,  as 
to  secret  conclaves,  and  conspiracies. 

At  the  v£ry  time  that  the  Old  School  were  thus  stig- 
matized, the  other  party  were  holding  meetings  in  the 
basement  of  the  Third  Church,  which  convened  with- 
out public  notice,  and  from  which  the  public  were  actu- 
ally excluded.  Here,  the  reconstruction  of  the  Boards 
was  discussed  ;  and  here  the  question  was  anxiously  con- 
sidered whether  the  seminary  at  Princeton  should  not 
be  remodeled.  But  the  conclusion  was,  that  the  Church 
was  not  yet  ripe  for  a  step  so  decisive. 


CHAPTER   XXXIII. 

THE   CRISIS. 

Committee  of  Correspondence — Causes  of  anxiety — The  Committee's 
circular  letter — Their  address — Separation  must  be  had — Anxiety 
respecting  the  Moderates — Conference  with  the  Princeton  profess- 
ors— Proposed  abandonment  of  Princeton — New  York  Union 
^Seminary  founded — Convention  called,  for  the  second  Thursday 
of  May — Published  warning  of  separation. 

In  the  conference  of  the  orthodox,  held  during  the 
sessions  of  the  Assembly  of  1836,  some  of  the  mem- 
bers were  inclined  to  proceed  at  once  to  extreme  meas- 
ures. Kecoiling  from  the  prospect  of  hopeless  strife 
and  growing  disorders,  and  startled  and  disgusted  with 
the  developments  of  that  Assembly,  they  were  urgent 
for  immediate  division  or  secession.  The  larger  num- 
ber, however,  although  indignant  at  the  haughty  spirit, 
the  clandestine  management  and  doctrinal  contradictions, 
of  the  majority,  were  opposed  to  so  extreme  a  step ;  re- 
garding it  as  only  justifiable  when  the  redemption  of 
the  Church  was  demonstrated  to  be  hopeless.  They 
proposed  a  committee  of  correspondence,  who  should 
consult  with  the  orthodox  brethren  throughout  the 
Church,  and  if  it  should  be  judged  expedient,  call  a 
Convention,  preliminary  to  the  next  Assembly ;  so  that 
the  whole  orthodox  part  of  the  Church  might  be  repre- 
sented and  consulted,  and  any  final  measures  be  adoj^ted 

604 


THE   CEISIS. 


505 


by  common  consent,  after  full  conference  and  delibera- 
tion. This  proposition  was  adopted,  and  a  committee 
accordingly  appointed.  It  consisted  of  the  Rev.  Drs. 
W.  ^y.  Phillips,  Joseph  McElroy,  George  Potts,  John 
Breckinridge,  Francis  McFarland,  W.  A.  McDowell, 
and  John  M.  Krebs ;  with  elders,  Henry  Rankin, 
Hugh  Auchincloss,  and  James  Lenox. 

The  duties  of  this  committee  were  of  the  most  respon- 
sible and   delicate  nature.      The  crisis  was   pressing. 
The  rejection  of  the  Western  Foreign  Missionary  So- 
ciety  was  not  only  a  criminal  breach  of  covenant,  but, 
in  view  of  the  facts  and  the  arguments  used,  indicated 
a  fixed  purpose  for  ever  to  exclude  the  Presbyterian 
Church,  through  its  own  organization,  from  the  foreign 
missionary  field.     The  mutilation  of  the  annual  report 
of  the  Board  of  Education,  the  treacherous  attempts  to 
revolutionize  it  and  the  Board  of  Missions,  and  the  de- 
nial to  the  Assembly  of  the  constitutional  power  to 
erect  Boards,  at  all,  or  to  organize  any  standing  execu- 
tive agency,  evinced  a  persistent  hostility  to  those  insti- 
tutions, which  threatened  their  utter  destruction.     The 
arbitrary  temper  manifested  by  the  leaders  of  the  party, 
when  they  found  themselves  sustained  by  a  clear  major- 
ity of  the  Assembly,  indicated  how  little  was  to  be  ex- 
pected from  their  forbearance,  if  once  possessed  of  deci- 
sive  control.      The   avowals   boastfully  and   defiantly 
made,  in   the  discussion  of  Barnes'  case,  of  doctrinal 
identification  with  him,  of  contempt  for  the  authority  of 
the  Constitution,  and  of  the  embrace  of  doctrines  at 
variance  with  it,  were  none  the  less  significant,  because 
of  the  zeal,  afterward,  so  strangely  aroused  and  unani- 
mously expressed  for  the  doctrines  of  the  Confession,  by 


43 


506  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 


men  whose  names  were  identified  with  life-long  labors, 
in  behalf  of  the  doctrines  of  the  new  divinity. 

The  attitude  of  the  Moderate  party,  and  its  influence 
in  inducing  the  present  condition  of  things,  were,  also, 
subjects  of  painful  and  anxious  thought.  It  was  felt 
that,  however  unintentionally,  their  influence  had  ope- 
rated, directly  and  most  powerfully,  to  discourage,  em- 
barrass, and  enfeeble  the  friends  of  the  Constitution, 
and  to  strengthen  the  hands  of  the  authors  of  innova- 
tion ;  and  that,  unless  they  could,  by  some  means,  be 
dislodged  from  their  present  position  and  brought  to  ■ 
co-operate  actively  with  their  brethren,  the  salvation  of  I 
the  Church  was  almost  beyond  hope. 

A  few  Aveeks  after  the  adjournment  of  the  Assembly, 
the  committee  issued,  in  lithograph,  a  circular  letter  to 
leading  ministers,  in  all  parts  of  the  Church,  de- 
signed to  elicit  facts  and  ascertain  their  sentiments,  as 
to  the  steps  to  be  taken  in  the  crisis.  Answers  were 
solicited  to  the  following  queries  : — 

"  1.  With  so  great  a  diversity  of  sentiment,  in  regard 
to  doctrine  and  order,  in  the  Presbyterian  Church,  can 
we  continue  united  in  one  body,  and  maintain  the  integ- 
rity of  our  standards,  and  promote  the  cause  of  truth 
and  righteousness  in  the  earth? 

"  2.  If  you  think  vne  can,  then  please  to  say  how  the 
causes  that,  at  present,  distract  us  can  be  removed. 

"  3.  Do  you  believe  that  there  are  ministers  in  our 
connection  who  hold  errors,  on  account  of  which  they 
ought  to  be  separated  from  us  ? 

"  4.  If  you  think  such  errors  are  held,  please  to  name 
them,  particularly. 

"  5.  If  you  believe  that  persons  holding  the  errors 


THE   CRISIS.  607 

you  name  ought  to  be  separated  from  our  communion, 
what,  in  your  judgment,  is  the  best  way  of  accom- 
plishing it  ? 

.    "  6.  It  was  repeatedly  avowed,  by  ministers  in  the 
last  General  Assembly,  that  they  received  the  Confes- 
sion of  Faith   of  our  Cluu'ch,  only  ^  for  substance  of  , 
doctrine,' — ^  as  a  system,'  or,  '  as  containing  the  Calvin-  • 
istic  system,  in  opposition  to  the  Arminian,'  etc.     Hence,  \ 
we  know  not  how  much  of  our  standards  they  adopt, 
and  how  much  they  reject.     Is  this,  in  your  opinion, 
the  true  intent  and  meaning  of  receiving  and  adopting 
the  Confession  of  Faith  ? 

^^7.  It  is  believed,  by  many,  that  much  of  the  evil 
of  which  we  now  complain  has  come  upon  us  in  conse- 
quence of  our  connection  with  Congregational  churches, 
within  our  own  bounds  and  represented  in  our  judicato- 
ries. We  would  ask  you,  whether,  in  your  judgment,  it 
would  not  be  better  for  us,  as  a  Church,  to  have  no  other 
connection  with  Congregationalists,  than  the  friendly 
one  which  we  now  have  with  them,  as  corresponding 
bodies?" 

It  has  been  denied,  of  late,  that  the  division  of  1837 
grew  out  of  doctrinal  questions.  But  it  will  be  ob- 
served, that  the  attention  of  this  committee,  in  this  con- 
fidential development,  was  occupied  almost  wholly,  with 
the  doctrinal  errors  which  prevailed.  It  will  also  be 
seen,  that,  in  the  seventh  question,  they  approximate 
the  very  solution  which  was  reached  by  the  next  As- 
sembly. 

The  issue  o£  this  paper  elicited  a  burst  of  indigna- 
tion from  the  New  School  leaders,  by  whom  it  was 
stigmatized  as  a  secret  conspiracy  against  the  peace  of 


508  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

the  Church.  It,  however,  accomplished  the  end  had 
in  view,  by  developing  a  vast  amount  of  information, 
as  to  the  precise  nature  and  extent  of  the  evils  com- 
plained of,  and  the  mind  of  the  most  judicious  men  in 
the  Church,  as  to  the  crisis. 

Predicated  upon  the  light  thus  obtained,  the  commit- 
tee then  published  ^^  An  Address  to  the  ministers,  elders, 
and  members  of  the  Presbyterian  Church,"  in  a  pamph- 
let of  41  pages.  In  this  publication,  as  introductory  to 
the  main  design,  it  was  maintained  "  that  the  prosperity 
of  the  Church,  and  her  efficiency,  in  securing  the  great 
ol>jects  of  her  institution,  depend,  under  God,  on  the 
purity  of  her  faith.'^  ^^  That  to  the  successful  mainte- 
nance of  the  truth  of  God, — to  union  of  effort  in  its 
maintenance, — creeds,  confessions  of  faith  are  indispen- 
sable ;" — and,  that  the  Confession  is  not  to  be  received 
"  for  substance,"  nor  "  as  a  system ;"  but  sincerely  as 
"  containing  the  system  of  doctrine  taught  in  the  Holy 
Scriptures." 

As  illustrative  of  a  different  view  of  this  subject,  the 
Address  then  proceeded  to  a  review  of  the  case  of  Mr. 
Barnes.  This  was  followed  by  an  exhibition  of  the 
missionary  question,  as  discussed  and  determined  in 
connection  with  the  repudiated  treaty  with  the  Synod 
of  Pittsburgh. 

The  result  of  the  whole  survey  was  expressed,  in  one 
word. — "  Fathers,  Brethren,  Fellow-Christians,  what- 
ever else  is  dark,  this  is  clear, —  We  cannot  continue  in 
the  same  body.  We  are  not  agreed,  and  it  is  vain  to 
attempt  to  walk  together.  That  those  whom  we  regard 
as  the  authors  of  our  present  distractions  will  retrace 
their  steps,  is  not  to  be  expected ;  and  that  those  who 


THE   CKISIS.  509 

have  hitherto  rallied  around  the  standards  of  our 
Church,  will  continue  to  do  so,  is  both  to  be  expected 
and  desired.  In  some  way  or  other,  therefore,  these 
men  must  be  separated  from  us."  How  this  should  be 
effected,  the  committee  did  not  venture  to  suggest. 

In  fact,  a  feeling  of  discouragement  and  despondence 
began  to  infect  the  ranks  of  the  orthodox,  and  to  beget 
a  disposition  to  seek  peace  and  a  pure  gospel  and  scrip- 
tural order,  in  the  bosom  of  the  Reformed  Dutch 
Church.  Particularly  disheartening  was  tlie  attitude 
maintained  by  the  Princeton  professors,  who,  while  they 
were  recognized  as  doctrinally  with  the  Old  School, 
were  found  in  opposition  to  almost  every  measure  pro- 
posed or  attempted  by  it,  for  the  reformation  of  the 
Church.  So  serious  was  the  embarrassment  hence  re- 
sulting, that  "  a  company  of  gentlemen  were  designated 
by  a  large  and  respectable  number  of  the  Old  School, 
to  proceed  in  a  noiseless  and  unobserved  manner,  to 
wait  upon  the  professors  at  their  homes,  to  reason  and 
remonstrate  with  them,  on  the  subject  of  their  position, 
and,  if  possible,  to  induce  them  to  concur  with  their 
brethren,  in  the  public  action  of  the  Church.  These 
gentlemen,  agreeably  to  the  arrangement  made  for  them, 
assembled  at  Princeton,  in  the  autumn  of  1836,  and 
met  the  professors,  in  Dr.  Hodge's  study,  whither  they 
had  been  invited  to  repair.  At  this,  conference,  the 
three  professors  of  the  Seminary  attended ;  and  the 
Rev.  J.  W.  Alexander  was  also  present.  The  following 
members  of  the  Old  School  deputation  were  in  attend- 
ance : — Rev.  Dr.  James  Blythe,  of  South  Hanover, 
Indiana ;  Dr.  C.  C.  Cuyler,  of  Philadelphia ;  Dr. 
George  Junkin,  of  Easton,  Pennsylvania;  Dr.  W.  W. 

43* 


510  HISTOKY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL, 

Phillips,  of  New  York ;  and  last  and  least,  the  hum- 
ble penman  of  these  pages/^ — the  Rev.  Dr.  Isaac  V. 
Brown. 

"Nothing  important  or  decisive  was  exhibited  in 
this  interview.  The  parties,  respectively,  with  much 
moderation,  stated  their  views,  but  without  any  decisive 
result.  In  the  course  of  these  remarks,  a  gentleman  in 
company  took  liberty  to  observe  that,  to  him  there  did 
not  appear  to  be  any  great  or  serious  obstacles  between 
them ;  and  that  it  really  seemeil  very  deplorable  that  so 
great  an  interest  should  be  left  in  suspense,  when  the 
only  difference  appeared  to  be  a  mere  matter  of  church 
policy.  After  an  interim  of  silence,  perhaps  five  min- 
utes in  duration,  the  Kev.  James  W.  Alexander,  then, 
comparaiiv^eiy,  a  young  man,  m  a  very  unassuming  and 
respectful  manner,  repeated  the  suggestion,  that  there 
was  really  very  little  difference  or  distance  between  the 
parties ;  and  manifested  a  strong  desire  that  an  entire 
reconciliation  should  take  place.  He  urged,  very  gently, 
that  the  parties  both  desired  the  same  thing;  and  they 
differed  merely  as  to  the  best  manner  of  accomplishing 
it.  This,  said  he,  is  not  a  sufficient  ground  upon  which 
to  jeopardize  so  great  an  interest.  Wise  men  do  not 
act  in  this  manner.  In  a  strain  somewhat  like  this, 
and  of  very  little  greater  extent, — the  remarker  did 
more,  probably,  toward  adjusting  the  difficulty,  than 
any  one  who  had  preceded  him.  The  tone,  as  well  as 
the  temper,  of  his  remarks,  seemed  a  little  above  his 
years ;  and  that  gave  to  them  a  peculiar  emphasis."* 

In  connection   with   this   Princeton   conference.   Dr. 
Brown  relates  a  fact  which  illustrates  the  extremity  of 
*  Brown's  Historical  Vindication,  p.  175. 


THE  CEISIS.  511 

the  situation  and  the  nature  of  the  apprehensions  felt 
by  the  best  men  in  the  Church.  He  states  that,  in 
New  York,  at  this  time,  lived  a  wealthy,  intelligent, 
and  devoted  ruling  elder.  In  common  with  many 
others,  he  was  apprehensive  that,  in  consequence  of  the 
mistaken  course  of  the  moderate  men,  the  policy  of  the 
New  School  party  was  about  to  acquire  permanent  con- 
trol over  the  Church  and  its  institutions.  He  was, 
therefore,  anxious  to  ascertain,  through  the  committee 
of  conference,  whether  the  Princeton  gentlemen  were 
determined  to  persist  in  the  active  opposition  heretofore 
maintained  by  them  to  the  reforming  policy  of  the  Old 
School.  He  was  opposed  to  scandalizing  the  cause  of 
religion,  by  protracting  a  hopeless  controversy;  and 
unless  some  lavorabie  maicatiuns  couia  oe  eiicited  Irom 
that  quarter,  "  he,  and  others  like-minded,  had  resolved 
to  abandon  Princeton,  immediately,  to  the  control  of 
the  adversary,  and  take  measures  to  establish  another 
seminary,  on  ground  entirely  out  of  their  reach.  For 
this  purpose,  the  money  was  ready  in  bank;  a  beautiful 
site,  with  appropriate  grounds  and  edifices,  was  selected ; 
the  principal  officers  of  the  institution  were  designated, 
from  among  the  most  prominent  in  our  Church,  and 
everything  ready  for  action.  But  the  delegates  did 
not,  upon  the  whole,  consider  the  condition  of  the 
seminary  at  Princeton,  exposed  as  it  was,  sufficiently 
desperate  to  warrant  so  great  a  sacrifice,  and  so  decisive 
a  change,  at  that  time.  In  this  feeling,  our  higlily 
respected  friends  in  New  York  cordially  acquiesced.'^* 
The  ruling  elder  here  referred  to  was  Hobert  Lenox 
Esq.,  the  father  of  that  eminent  servant  of  Christ  and 
*  Brown's  Historical  Vindication,  p.  176. 


612  HISTORY  OF  THE  NEW  SCHOOL. 

benefactor  of  our  Church,  James  Lenox,  Esq.,  of  New 
York. 

.  The  Committee  of  Conference  left  Princeton,  greatly 
disheartened  at  the  seeming  failure  of  j^heir  mission. 
And  yet  the  result  showed  that  they  had  not  labored  in 
vain.  Influenced,  no  doubt,  partly,  by  the  considera- 
tions urged  in  this  conference,  and  partly,  by  convic- 
tions, subsequently  reached,  as  to  the  plans  and  policy 
of  the  New  School,  Dr.  Alexander  was  found  among 
the  foremost  in  the  next  Assembly,  in  devising  and  exe- 
cuting the  measures,  which  brought  deliverance  to  the 
Church. 

It  was. about  this  time,  that  New  York  Union  Theo- 
logical Seminary  was  founded,  upon  a  plan  expressly 
devised  to  keep  it  out  of  the  control  of  the  General 
Assembly,  should  a  majority  of  that  body,  at  any  time, 
prove  to  be  Old  School.  ''  It  was  felt  that,  sustained 
by  the  patronage  and  confidence  of  the  pastors  and 
churches  of  the  city  of  New  York,  and  those  who  sym- 
pathized with  them,  throughout  the  Church,  the  pro- 
posed institution  might  be  competently  endowed,  ably 
officered  and  well  sustained.  It  would,  at  least,  in  the 
hands  of  directors  independent  of  the  Assembly,  remain 
under  the  control  of  men  who  would  promote  its  inter- 
ests, without  reference  to  an  accidental  majority  in  the 
Assembly.  It  was  consequently,  established  and  placed 
under  the  care  of  a  Board  of  Directors  appointed  by  its 
founders.'^ '^ 

The  institution  was  projected  in  1835.     In  October 
of  that  year,  nine  persons   met  at  a  private  house,  to 
consult  as  to  the  proposition, — four  ministers,  of  whom 
*  Gillett's  History,  vol.  ii.,  p.  501. 


THE   CRISIS.  513 

Er.skine  Mason  was  one,  and  Dr.  Thomas  McAuley  and 
Henry  White,  probably  two  of  tlie  others ;  and  five 
laymen.  The  institution  was  founded  in  January, 
1836,  and  went  into  operation  before  the  elose  of  the 
'  year. 

The  original  faculty  were  Dr.  Thomas  McAuley, 
President  and  Professor  of  Pastoral  Theology  and 
Church  Government ;  Henry  White,  Professor  of  The- 
ology ;  Dr.  Edwin  Robinson,  Professor  of  Oriental  and 
Biblical  Literature ;  Dr.  Thomas  H.  Skinner,  Professor 
of  Sacred  Phetoric;  Dr.  I.  S.  Spencer,  Professor  of 
Biblical  Historv  and  its  Connections  :  and  Dr.  Erskine 
]\lason.  Professor  of  Ecclesiastical  History.  George 
Bush  was  temporarily  engaged  to  supply  the  place  of 
Dr.  Robinson.* 

As  the  time  approached  when  the  General  Assembly 
must  again  convene,  the  most  anxious  thought  and  ex- 
pectations were  directed  to  its  deliberations  and  their 
probable  results  ;  as  all  felt  that,  for  weal  or  woe,  its 
decisions  would  and  ou^ht  to  be  final.  Should  the 
New  School  party  prove  to  be  in  the  majority,  those 
who  had  so  long  and  faithfully  contended  against  their 
innovations  were  determined  to  withdraw  from  the 
Church  and  erect,  on  independent  ground,  the  same 
standard,  around  which  they  had  always  rallied. 
Should  the  Old  School  have  a  majority,  their  purpose 
was  fixed,  to  adopt  such  decisive  measures  as  would 
terminate  controversy,  and  put  an  end  to  the  schemes 
of  innovation. 

In  fulfillment  of  the  design  of  their  appointment,  the 
Committee  of  Correspondence,  on  the  12th  of  January, 

*  Gillett,  p.  501. 


514  HISTORY   OF   THE    NEW   SCHOOL. 

issued  a  call  for  a  convention,  to  meet  in  Philadelphia, 
on  the  second  Thursday  of  May,  1837,  one  week  pre- 
ceding the  meeting  of  the  Assembly.  In  their  circular, 
the  committee  stated  the  result  of  their  correspondence 
to  be  '^  a  conviction  that  the  real  friends  of  the  doctrines 
and  of  the  institutions  of  our  Church  are  now  satisfied 
that  the  present  state  of  things  ought  not,  longer,  to 
continue;  and  that  the  time  has  come  when  effectual 
measures  must  be  taken  for  putting  an  end  to  those 
contentions  which  have,  for  years,  agitated  our  Church, 
by  removing  the  causes  in  which  they  originated.^^  As 
to  the  measures  to  be  adopted  to  accomplish  this  object, 
the  committee  declined  making  any  suggestions.  They, 
however,  recommended  ^^  ministers  and  churches  that 
mourn  over  the  false  doctrines  so  industriously  propa- 
gated, by  many  in  our  connection,  the  contentions  and 
strife  thereby  engendered,  and  the  consequent  with- 
drawal of  the  influences  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  to  ob- 
serve the  second  Thursday  of  May,  next,  as  a  day  of 
fasting,  humiliation  and  prayer,  in  view  of  these  evils, 

and  to  implore   the  Divine   direction   in  the   present 

•  •    J) 
crisis. 

This  call  was  published  in  all  the  old  School  papers ; 
and  full  warning  was  thus  given  to  all  parties,  of  the 
momentous  issues  depending  upon  the  decisions  of  the 
approaching  Assembly. 

In  the  mean  time,  publications  made  by  such  men  as 
Dr.  Miller,  of  Princeton,  Dr.  John  Breckinridge,  and 
Dr.  Francis  McFarland,  and  the  editors  of  the  Prince- 
ton Review, — men  of  the  mildest  spirit  and  most 
moderate  sentiments,  attested  the  reality  and  greatness 
of  the  danger,  indicated  the  modified  views  of  Prince- 


THE   CRTSIS.  515 

ton,  and  did  much  to  unite  men  of  like  sentiments  and 
spirit,  in  approval  and  support  of  the  decisive  measures 
which  were  about  to  be  employed  for  the  reformation 
of  the  Church. 


CHAPTER  XXXIV. 


THE   REFORMING   ASSEMBLY   OF   1837. 


The  Convention  of  1837 — Its  testimony  and  memorial — The  Assem- 
bly— Committee  on  the  Memorial — Abrogation  of  the  plan  of 
union — Citation  of  judicatories — Committee  on  Amicable  Separa- 
tion— Purposes  of  the  New  School — The  disowning  acts — Certain] 
Synods  admonished — Other  measures  of  the  Assembly — Protests 
and  replies — Provisions  as  to  the  roll  of  1838 — Character  of  this. 
Assembly — The  majority  and  the  slavery  question. 

The  convention  called  by  the  Committee  of  Corre- 
spondence^ met  at  10  o'clock,  on  the  11th  of  May,  1837. 
The  Rev.  Dr.  James  Blythe  was  appointed  temporary 
chairman,  and  the  Rev.  Thomas  D.  Baird,  temporary 
secretary.  The  entire  day  was  consecrated  to  hnmilia- 
tion  and  prayer.  On  the  next  day,  the  Convention  was 
organized  by  forming  the  roll,  and  appointing  as  per- 
manent officers,  the  Rev.  Dr.  G.  A.  Baxter,  President ; 
the  Rev.  Dr.  C.  C.  Cuyler,  Vice  President;  the  Rev. 
Thomas  D.  Baird,  Recording  Clerk ;  and  the  Rev.  H.| 
S.  Pratt,  Reading  Clerk. 

There  were  in  attendance,  one  hundred  and  twenty] 
members,  representing  fifty-two  Presbyteries,  and  thir- 
teen minorities.     The  course  pursued  by  the  previous 
Assembly,  Avith  respect  to  the  foreign  missionary  ques-' 
tion,  the  facts  in  connection  with  the  case  of  Mr.  Barnes, 
and  the  other  causes  mentioned  in  the  last  chaj^ter,  had 

616 


THE   EEFORMING   ASSEMBLY   OF    1837.  517 

Oj^erated  powerfully,  to  arouse  the  attention  of  the  South- 
ern churches,  and  to  convince  them  of  the  true  character 
of  the  controversy,  and  the  vital  nature  of  the  interests 
at  stake.  They  were,  therefore,  largely  represented  in 
the  convention,  and  the  developments  there  made 
brought  them  generally  to  decisive  co-operation  with 
the  Old  School,  in  the  measures  of  reform  adopted  by 
the  Assembly. 

The  sessions  of  the  Convention  were'  occupied,  mainly, 
with  inquiry  as  to  the  nature  and  extent,  of  the  here- 
sies and  disorders  w^hich  were  prevalent.  The  roll  w^as 
called,  and  each  member,  in  turn,  invited  to  state  the 
facts  of  his  knowledge.  The  developments  thus  re- 
ceived were  of  such  a  character  as  to  banish  doubt  from 
the  minds  of  the  most  skeptical,  and  confirm  the  entire 
body  in  the  conviction  of  the  necessity  of  some  im- 
mediate and  adequate  remedy.  Particularly  emphatic 
and  precise  w^as  the  testimony  respecting  Western  New 
York,  the  Western  Reserve,  and  Illinois,  where  con- 
tempt and  hostility  to  the  doctrines  of  the  Confession 
were  freely  avowed,  and  the  heresies  of  Taylor  and  policy 
of  Finney  were  openly  cherished. 

The  results  of  the  discussions  and  deliberations  were 
embodied  in  a  Testimony  and  Memorial  to  the  Assem- 
bly. This  most  able  and  impressive  paper  was  pre- 
pared by  a  committee,  consisting  of  the  Rev.  Messrs.  R. 
J.  Breckinridge,  George  Potts,  and  Thomas  Smyth,  and 
Elders,  Nathaniel  Ewing,  and  David  Fullerton. 

The  Memorial,  after  the  opening  address  to  the  Gen- 
eral Assembly,  proceeded  to  justify  the  course  of  the 
Old  School,  under  the  circumstances  of  the  times. — 
"  That  we  have  not  been  rash  and  hasty,  nor  manifested 

44 


518  HISTORY   OF    THE    NEW   SCHOOL. 

a  factious  opposition,  to  errors  and  disorders,  which 
were  only  of  small  extent,  or  recent  introduction,  is 
manifestly  proven  by  the  fact  that  these  evils  have  been 
insidiously  spreading  through  our  Church  for  many 
years — and  that  they  have  at  length  become  so  mature, 
and  so  diifused,  as  not  only  to  ])ervade  large  portions  of 
the  Church,  but  to  reign  triumphantly  over  the  body 
itself,  through  successive  General  Assemblies.  On  the 
other  hand,  that  'we  have  not  been  wholly  faithless  to 
our  Master  and  to  truth,  we  appeal  to  the  constant 
efforts  of  some,  through  the  press  and  pulpit — to  the 
firm  and  consistent  course  of  some  of  our  Presbyteries 
and  Synods — to  the  faithful  conduct  of  the  minorities 
in  the  Assemblies  of  1831-2-3-4,  and  6— to  the  Act 
and  Testimony — to  the  proceedings  of  the  Conventions 
of  Cincinnati  in  1831,  and  Pittsburgh  in  1835,  and  to 
the  noble  Assembly  of  1835." 

The  memorialists  then  testify,  in  the  following  im- 
pressive language,  that  it  is  the  corrupting  of  the  pure 
gospel  of  Christ  against  which  they  have  contended, 
and  that  all  the  other  questions  are  subordinate  to  this. 
"  We  contend,  especially  and  above  all,  for  the  truth^  as 
it  is  made  known  to  us  of  God,  for  the  salvation  of  men. 
We  contend  for  nothing  else,  except  as  the  result  or 
support  of  this  inestimable  treasure.  It  is  because  this 
is  subverted  that  we  grieve;  it  is  because  our  standards 
teach  it,  that  we  bewail  their  perversion ;  it  is  because 
our  Cliarch  order  and  discipline  preserve,  defend,  and 
diffuse  it,  that  we  weep  over  their  impending  ruin.  It 
is  against  errw  that  we  emphatically  bear  our  testi- 
mony,— error  dangerous  to  the  souls  of  men,  dishonoring 
to  Jesus  Christ,  contrary  to  his  revealed  truth,  and  ut- 


THE   REFORMING   ASSEMBLY   OF    1837.  519 

terly  at  variance  with  our  standards.  Error,  not  as  it 
may  be  freely  and  openly  held  by  others,  in  this  age 
and  land  of  absolute  religious  freedom ;  but  error,  held 
and  taught  in  the  Presbyterian  Church— preached  and 
written  by  persons  who  profess  to  receive  and  adopt 
our  scriptural  standards— promoted  by  societies  opera- 
ting widely  through  our  churches — reduced  into  form, 
and  openly  embraced  by  almost  entire  Presbyteries  and 
Synods — favored  by  repeated  acts  of  successive  General 
Assemblies,  and  at  last  virtually  sanctioned,  to  an 
alarming  extent,  by  the  numerous  Assembly  of  1836. 

^'  To  be  more  specific,  we  hereby  set  forth  in  order, 
some  of  the  doctrinal  errors  against  which  we  bear  testi- 
mony, and  which  we,  and  the  churches,  have  conclusive 
proof,    are    widely    disseminated    in    the    Presbyterian 

Church. 

"1.  That  God  would  have  prevented  the  existence 
of  sin  in  our  world,  but  was  not  able  without  destroying 
the  moral  agency  of  man ;  or,  that  for  aught  that  ap- 
pears in  the  Bible  to  the  contrary,  sin  is  incidental  to 
any  wise  moral  system. 

^'  2.  That  election  to  eternal  life  is  founded  on  a  fore- 
sight of  faith  and  obedience. 

"  3.  That  we  have  no  more  to  do  with  the  first  sin  of 
Adam  than  with  the  sins  of  any  other  parent. 

"  4.  That  infants  come  into  the  world  as  free  from 
moral  defilement  as  was  Adam,  when  he  was  created. 

"5.  That  infants  sustain  the  same  relation  to  the 
moral  government  of  God  in  this  world  as  brute  ani- 
mals, and  that  their  sufferings  and  death  are  to  be  ac- 
counted for,  on  the  same  principles  as  those  of  brutes, 
and  not  by  any  means  to  be  considered  as  penal. 


520  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

"  6.  That  til  ere  Is  no  other  original  sin  than  the  fact 
that  all  the  posterity  of  Adam,  though  by  nature  inno- 
cent, or  possessed  of  no  moral  character,  will  always 
begin  to  sin  when  they  begin  to  exercise  moral  agency ; 
that  original  sin  does  not  include  a  sinful  bias  of  the 
huiuan  mind,  and  a  just  exposure  to  penal  suffering; 
and  that  there  is  no  evidence  in  Scripture,  that  infants, 
in  order  to  salvation,  do  need  redemption  by  the  blood 
of  Christ,  and  regeneration  by  the  Holy  Ghost. 

"  7.  That  the  doctrine  of  imputation,  whether  of  the 
guilt  of  Adam's  sin  or  of  the  righteousness  of  Christ, 
has  no  foundation  in  the  Word  of  God,  and  is  both 
unjust  and  absurd. 

"  8.  That  the  sufferings  and  death  of  Christ  were  not 
truly  vicarious  and  penal,  but  symbolical,  governmental, 
and  instructive  only. 

"  9.  That  the  impenitent  sinner  is  by  nature,  and  inde- 
pendently of  the  renewing  influence  or  almighty  energy 
of  the  Holy  Spirit,  in  full  possession  of  all  the  ability 
necessary  to  a'  full  compliance  with  all  the  commands 
of  God. 

"10.  That  Christ  does  not  intercede  for  the  elect  until 
after  their  regeneration. 

"11.  That  saving  faith  Is  not  an  effect  of  the  special 
operation  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  but  a  mere  rational  be- 
lief of  the  truth,  or  assent  to  the  word  of  God. 

"12.  That  regeneration  is  the  act  of  the  sinner  him- 
self, and  that  it  consists  in  a  change  of  his  governing 
purpose,  which  he  himself  must  produce,  and  which  is 
the  result,  not  of  any  direct  influence  of  the  Holy  Spirit 
on  the  heart,  but  chiefly,  of  a  persuasive  exhibition  of 
the  truth    analogous  to  the  influence  which  one  man 


THE  EEFOEMING  ASSEMBLY  OP  1837.  621 

exerts  over  the  mind  of  another ;  or,  that  regeneration 
is  not  an  instantaneous  act,  but  a  progressive  work. 

'^  13.  That  God  has  done  all  that  he  can  do  for  the 
salvation  of  all  men,  and  that  man  himself  must  do 
the  rest. 

"  14.  That  God  cannot  exert  such  influence  on  the 
minds  of  men,  as  shall  make  it  certain  that  they  will 
choose  and  act  in  a  particular  manner,  without  impair- 
ing their  moral  agency. 

"  15.  That  the  righteousness  of  Christ  is  not  the  sole 
ground  of  the' sinner's  acceptance  with  God  ;  and  that  in 
no  sense  does  the  righteousness  of  Christ  become  ours. 

"  16.  That  the  reason  why  some  differ  from  others  in 
regard  to  their  reception  of  the  Gospel  is,  that  they 
make  themselves  to  differ. 

"  It  is  impossible  to  contemplate  these  errors  withr 
out  perceiving,  that  they  strike  at  the  foundation  of 
the  system  of  Gospel  grace ;  and  that,  from  the  days 
of  Pelagius  and  Cassian  to  the  present  hour,  their  re- 
ception has  uniformly  marked  the  character  of  a  Church 
apostatizing  from  ^  the  faith  once  delivered  to  the  saints,' 
and  sinking  into  deplorable  corruption." 

This  statement  of  prevalent  errors,  after  being  framed 
by  the  committee,  was,  at  their  request,  carefully  re- 
vised by  the  Rev.  Dr.  Miller,  than  whom  no  man  in 
the  Church  was  less  open  to  the  charge  of  giving  coun- 
tenance to  false  accusations,  or  imaginary  alarms.  Tlie 
above  is  the  form  in  which  the  paper  was  adopted  by 
the  Assembly ;  differing,  by  three  or  four  mere  verbal 
alterations,  from  the  original,  as  embodied  in  the  Me- 
morial. 

The  memorial  presented  a  similar  statement  of  "  de- 

44*      . 


522  HISTORY  OF   THE  NEW  SCHOOL. 

partures  from  sound  Presbyterian  order/^  and  discipline. 
It  then  proceeded  to  indicate  necessary  measures  of 
reform.  These  were, — the  abrogation  of  the  Plan  of 
Union-; — the  discountenancing  of  the  operations  of  the 
American  Home  Missionary  and  Education  Societies 
within  the  ecclesiastical  limits  of  the  Church ; — the 
bringing  into  order,  dissolution,  or  separation  from  the 
Church,  of  every  inferior  court,  not  regularly  organ- 
ized ; — the  requiring  of  Presbyteries  to  examine  appli- 
cants from  other  denominatiolis,  on  theology  and  church 
government,  personal  piety,  and  ministerial  qualifica- 
tions, and  to  require  of  them  an  explicit  adoption  of 
the  standards ; — the  enforcing  of  discipline  against 
heretical  ministers,  and  courts  that  tolerate  them ;  and 
the  adoption  of  measures  ''  that  such  of  these  bodies  as 
are  believed  to  consist  chiefly  of  decidedly,  unsound  or 
disorderly  members  may  be  separated  from  the  Church,^' 
provision  being  made  for  any  cases  of  orderly  members 
or  churches  among  them ; — and  the  admonition  of  such 
voluntary  societies  as  were  not  expressly  condemned.* 

This  paper  was  drafted  in  the  name  of  the  Conven- 
tion, and  signed  by  its  officers. 

The  regular  sessions  of  the  Convention  continued 
until  the  meeting  of  the  General  Assembly,  when  they 
were  merged  in  conferences  held  from  time  to  time,  as 
occasion  indicated. 

Upon  the  opening  of  the  Assembly,  the  election  of 
Moderator  and  clerks  showed  a  decided  Old  School 
majority.  The  Rev.  Dr.  David  Elliott  was  chosen 
Moderator,  by  137  votes,  against  106  cast  for  the  Pev. 
Baxter  Dickinson.  On  the  second  day  of  the  sessions, 
*  For  this  paper,  in  full,  see  Digest,  p,  710. 


THE  REFORMING  ASSEMBLY  OF   1837.  523 

the  memorial  was  presented,  and  referred  to  tlie  Com- 
mittee of  Bills  and  Overtures.  The  next  day  it  was 
reported  back  to  the  Assembly,  and  was,  at  once  re- 
ferred to  the  Rev.  Drs.  Alexander,  Plumer,  Green,  Bax- 
ter, and  Leland,  and  Elders  Walter  Lowrie  and  James 
Lenox. 

On  Monday,  the  2 2d,  this  committee  reported,  in 
part,  the  doctrinal  testimony  of  the  Convention,  with  a 
few  verbal  alterations,  as  above  copied.  The  adoption 
of  this  paper  was  designed  as  a  basis  for  whatever  fur- 
ther action  the  Assembly  might  take ;  as  all  recognized 
this  to  be  the  fundamental  issue,  out  of  which  all  the 
others  had  sprung  and  derived  their  importance.  To 
defeat  this  purpose,  the  New  School  Jiad  recourse  to  the 
policy  of  so  overloading  the  doctrinal  testimony,  by 
additions  proposed,  on  points  disputed  by  no  one  in  the 
Church,  as  to  deprive  it  of  any  practical  significance  or 
value.  To  avoid,  therefore,  a  protracted  discussion,  the 
report  was,  for  the  present,  postponed. 

The  committee,  also,  reported  resolutions,  recom- 
mending the  cultivation  of  friendly  relations  with  the 
Congregational  churches ;  but  proposing  the  abrogation 
of  the  Plan  of  Union.  The  former  was,  immediately, 
adopted.  The  proposed  abrogation  of  the  Plan,  elicited 
earnest  discussion.  Its  unchangeable  authority  was 
urged,  upon  the  false  assumption,  that  it  was  not  a  mere 
^'Regulation"  of  the  Assembly,  and  subject  to  its  dis- 
cretion, but  a  solemn  "compact,"  or  covenant,  with  the 
Association  of  Connecticut,  which  could  not  be  set  aside, 
without  a  gross  breach  of  faith. 

In  the  course  of  the  discussion.  Dr.  McAuley  asked, 
whether  the  abrogation  would  be  retrospective,  or  pros- 


524  HISTORY  OF  THE  NEW  SCHOOL. 

pective  only.  Dr.  Alexander  replied,  that  he  could 
speak  for  himself  only, — that  he  regarded  the  propo- 
sition as  having  respect  to  the  future,  rather  than  to  the 
past; — that  as  to  the  churches  already  formed  under 
the  Plan,  he  presumed  some  arrangement  would  be 
adopted  to  allow  them  a  year  or  so,  to  choose,  between 
Presbyterianism  and  the  Congregational  system. 

The  abrogation  was  discussed,  till  the  close  of  Tues- 
day's sessions,  when,  upon  a  call  for  the  previous  ques- 
tion, the  resolution  passed,  by  a  vote  of  143  to  110. 

On  the  morning  of  Thursday,  the  25th,  the  committee 
on  the  Memorial  reported  in  full ;  and  on  the  after- 
noon, Mr.  Plumer,  in  accordance  with  its  suggestions, 
moved  that  the  proper  steps  be  now  taken  to  cite  to  the 
bar  of  the  next  Assembly  any  inferior  judicatories 
charged  with  disorder  ; — that  a  committee  be  appointed 
to  digest  the  plan  of  procedure ; — and  that,  as  citation 
is  the  commencement  of  process,  the  judicatories  in- 
volved be  excluded  from  seats  in  the  next  Assembly, 
till  their  cases  are  decided. 

In  the  discussion  on  these  resolutions,  it  was  urged 
by  the  New  School  speakers,  that  the  doctrinal  diversi- 
ties which  prevailed  were  merely  different  modes  of 
exjplaining  the  doctrines  of  the  Confession ;  and  that 
the  Assembly  had  no  right  to  try  inferior  courts,  nor  to 
exclude  them  from  their  seats,  pending  process.  Dr. 
Beman  warned  the  house,-  that  this  Assembly  is  a  very 
different  body  from  the  next.  There  may  be  a  change 
of  all  its  members.  The  members  composing  it  will 
come  with  commissions  in  their  pockets,  and  cannot  be 
excluded.  "  The  men  you  propose  to  exclude  are  Ther- 
mopyiffi  men.     They  are  Smithfield  men.     This  resolu- 


THE    REFORMING    ASSEMBLY   OF    1837.  525 

tion  will  blow  a  blast  which  will  bring  fifty  men  to 
;this  place,  who  might  now,  rightfully,  be  here.  They 
will  meet  the  question  at  Philippi,  and  there  will  they 
settle  it." 

The  warning  and  defiance  thus  given  were  not  un- 
heeded. The  resolutions  were  adopted,  on  Friday  even- 
ing, upon  a  call  for  the  previous  question,  by  a  vote  of 
128  to  122.  A  committee  was  then  appointed,  consist- 
ing of  Dr.  Cuyler,  Mr.  Breckinridge,  Dr.  Baxter,  IMr. 
McKennan,  and  Mr.  Baird,  to  ascertain  the  judicatories 
charged  with  disorders,  and  report  a  plan  of  procedure, 
in  the  matter. 

Mr.  Breckinridge  then  gave  notice  that  he  would,  on 
the  next  morning,  propose  the  appointment  of  a  com- 
mittee of  equal  numbers  from  the  majority  and  minority, 
to  consult  upon  a  voluntary  division  of  the  Church. 
This  motion,  upon  being  presented,  in  the  morning,  was 
adopted.  The  committee  consisted  of  Rev.  R.  J.  Breck- 
inridge, Dr.  Alexander,  Dr.  Cuyler,  Dr.  Witherspoon, 
and  Nathaniel  Ewfng,  Esq.,  on  the  part  of  the  majority; 
and  Dr.  McAuley,  Dr.  Beman,  Dr.  Peters,  Dr.  Dickin- 
son, and  William  Jessup,  Esq.,  on  the  part  of  the 
minority.  The  committee  and  the  subject  referred  to 
it  were  then  commended  to  God,  in  prayer,  led  by  Dr. 
Baxter. 

On  the  afternoon  of  Tuesday,  the  30th,  this  com- 
mittee reported,  through  Dr.  Alexander,  that  they  had 
not  been  able  to  agree.  It  appeared  from  the  papers 
submitted,  that  the  two  sub-committees  were  agreed  as 
to  the  propriety  of  a  voluntary  separation ;  and  as  to 
the  corporate  funds,  the  names  to  be  held  by  the  two 
denominations,  the  records,  and  the  Boards  and  institu- 


526  HISTORY   OF   THE    NEW   SCHOOL. 

tions  of  the  Church.  It  was  agreed  that  the  Old  School 
should  retain  the  -name,  the  Boards,  the  seminary  at 
Princeton,  (Alleghany  seems  to  have  been  overlooked,) 
and  the  records  of  the  Assembly.  It  was,  also,  agreed 
that  the  New  School  Assembly  should  be  known  as  the 
General  Assembly  of  the  American  Presbyterian  Church ; 
that  a  certified  copy  of  all  the  records  of  the  Church 
should  be  made  for  its  use,  and  that  the  corporate  funds 
of  the  Church,  not  belonging  to  Princeton  Seminary, 
should  be  equally  divided.  These  amounted,  in  all,  to 
less  than  twenty  thousand  dollars. 

The  committee  disagreed  as  to  the  propriety  of  enter- 
ing at  once  upon  the  division ; — as  to  the  power  of  the 
Assembly  to  do  it ; — -and  as  to  breaking  up  its  succes- 
sion,— the  New  School  insisting  that  neither  of  the 
bodies  should  be  recognized,  as,  in  law,  or  in  fact,  the 
lineal  successor  of  the  existing  Assembly. 

At  one  stage  in  the  consultations  of  the  committees, 
they  seemed  to  be  about  to  agree.  The  minority  com- 
mittee proposed  that  the  points  on  which  they  disagreed 
should  be  submitted  to  the  Assembly,  for  its  decision. 
But  it  appeared,  upon  explanation,  that  they  did  not 
intend  to  hold  themselves  bound  by  the  action  of  the 
Assembly,  on  the  points  thus  to  be  submitted,  should  it 
be  contrary  to  their  views.  The  majority  committee, 
therefore,  concluded  that  a  voluntai^y  separation  was 
altogether  impossible,  and  informed  the  minority  that, 
unless  they  had  something  else  to  offer,  this  proposition 
must  be  considered  a  virtual  waiver  of  the  whole  sub- 
ject. The  position  maintained  by  the  minority  com- 
mittee was,  that  they  could  not  assent  to  any  division, 
by  the  present  Assembly ;  "  as  it  would,  in  no  wise,  be 


THE   REFORMING   ASSEMBLY   OF    1837.  527 

obligatory  on  any  of  the  judicatories  of  the  Church,  or 
any  members  of  the  churches.  The  only  effect  would 
be,  a  disorderly  dissolution  of  the  present  Assembly, 
and  be  of  no  binding  force  or  effect  upon  any  member 
"Nvho  did  not  assent  to  it."  They  insisted  that,  in  order 
to  separation,  the  plan  must  be  sent  down  to  the  Pres- 
byteries and  receive  their  sanction,  as  an  amendment  of 
the  Constitution. 

The  motion  for  the  appointment  of  the  joint  com- 
mittee, had  been  made  by  Mr.  Breckinridge,  at  the 
suggestion  of  Dr.  Peters ;  and  it  became  evident,  from 
tlie  result,  that  the  object  was,  to  postpone  action,  so  as 
to  enable  the  minority  to  call  the  phalanx  of  '^  Ther- 
mopylae" to  the  plains  of  ^^  Philippi," — to  gather  a 
majority  for  the  Assembly  of  1838. 

The  report  of  the  committee  put  an  end  to  all  hope 
of  an  amicable  division.  Tlie  committee  was,  therefore, 
discharged,  and  the  subject  laid  on  the  table. 

The  Old  School  were  now  placed  in  a  most  critical 
situation.  "We  have  responsible  names,"  said  the  Rev. 
Thomas  D.  Baird,  a  man  whose  candor  and  truth  were 
attested  by  his  O2:)ponents,  themselves, — "  without  any 
restraint  of  confidence,  except  what  our  own  sense  of 
propriety  may  impose,  and  we  have  not  the  slightest 
shadow  of  doubt,  that,  for  the  General  Assembly,  there 
was  a  reforming  process  prepared,  on  the  opposite  side,  no 
less  severe  and  decisive  than  that  which  was  applied  by 
the  orthodox.  Many,  however,  are  so  easily  scandalized, 
by  an  exposition  of  names,  that  we  shall,  at  present, 
'  forbear ;  and  only  state  what  we  distinctly  understood 
to  be  a  part  of  the  contemplated  process.  1.  The  re- 
moval and  change  of  at  least  two  of  the  Princeton  pro- 


528  HISTORY   OF   THE    NEW   SCHOOL. 

fessors.  This  has  sometimes  been  the  subject  of  con- 
versation, for  years,  and  had  now  become  ripe  for  exe- 
cution. 2.  The  entire  change  of  the  Boards  of  Mis- 
sions and  Education.  A  partial  attempt  was  made  at  this 
alteration,  last  year,  which  was  to  have  been  carried  out,  at 
the  late  Assembly,  had  not  a  wise  and  kind  Providence 
interposed  to  defeat  it.  These  two  acts  would  have  en- 
tirely changed  the  face  and  character  of  the  Presbyterian 
Church  ;  had  nothing  else  been  done ;  but  the  process 
was  not  to  end  there.  3.  Individuals  and  judicatories 
were  to  be  subjected — according  to  the  invidious  phrase- 
ology now  adopted — to  the  guillotine;  and,  no  doubt, 
in  the  hands  of  New  School  men,  it  would  have  been  a 
lawful  and  wise  expedient."* 

The  alternative  now  presented  to  the  majority  was, 
to  take  decisive  steps  lor  the  reform  of  the  Church, 
or  supinely  surrender  her  to  the  patrons  of  the  new 
theology. 

In  the  discussion,  on  the  citation  of  inferior  ju- 
dicatories, Dr.  Beman  had  so  ably  exhibited  the  em- 
barrassments to  which  that  proceeding  would  be  liable, 
as  to  create  very  serious  apprehensions,  as  to  the  result. 
These  were  increased,  by  the  closeness  of  the  vote  on 
the  measure,  the  majority  being  reduced  to  six,  in  con- 
sequence of  distrust  in  the  practicability  of  the  plan. 
Pondering  upon  the  situation.  Dr.  Baxter  was  led  to 
reflect  that  those  inferior  courts  which  were  infected 
with  unsound  doctrine,  had,  almost  without  exception, 
been  organized  and  still  remained  under  the  Plan  of 
Union ;  and  that  as  all  that  has  been  done  upon  an  un- 
constitutional basis  falls  with  it,  the  abrogation  of  the 
*  Pittsburgh  Christian  Herald,  1837,  p.  103. 


THE   REFORMING   ASSEMBLY   OF    1837.  529 

Plan  operated  to  the  dissolution  of  those  courts.  Pend- 
ing the  conference  upon  amicable  separation,  a  meeting 
of  the  Convention  was  called,  the  suggestion  laid  before 
it  and  approved,  and  action  in  accordance  with  it  de- 
cided upon. 

Upon  the  discharge,  therefore,  of  the  Committee  of 
Conference,  Mr.  Plumer  moved, 

"  That,  by  the  operation  of  the  abrogation  of  the 
Plan  of  Union  of  1801,  the  Synod  of  the  Western  Re- 
serve is,  and  is  hereby  declared  to  be,  no  longer  a  part 
of  the  Presbyterian  Church  in  the  United  States  of 
America." 

During  the  discussion  of  this  resolution.  Dr.  Junkin 
was  interrupted,  in  a  statement  of  the  heresies  and  dis- 
orders prevalent  in  the  Western  Reserve,  by  Mr.  Seward 
of  that  Synod ;  who  offered  himself,  as  a  witness  in  its 
behalf. 

He  was  asked,  "  Did  you  assent  to  the  Constitutional 
questions,  prescribed  for  ministers^  at  your  ordination  ?" 

To  this  he  refused  to  answer. 

Dr.  Beman. — "  Mr»  Seward  has  been  interrupted  by 
questions." 

The  Moderator. — "Mr.  Seward  requested  that  he 
might  be  questioned." 

Mr.  Seward. — "  I  do  adopt  the  book." 

Question. — "  Did  you  do  so,  at  your  ordination  ?" 

No  reply. 

Mr.  Brown,  Elder  from  the  Presbytery  of  Lorain. — 
"  We  have  been  greatly  misrepresented.  There  are  thirty 
Presbyterian  Churches  in  our  Synod."* 

*  Those  churches  had  twenty  Commissioners  on  the  floor  of  the 
Assembly. 
45 


530  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL.  ^1 

■  m 

Dr.  Cuyler. — "  There  are  one  liundred  and  thirty- 
nine  churches  in  the  Synod.^' 

Mr.  Brown. — "  The  Confessions  used  in  these  churches 
are  abstracts  of  the  Presbyterian  Confession.  My  Pres- 
bytery consists  of  twelve  churches;  I  do  not  know  of 
more  than  one,  that  is  strictly  Presbyterian.^' 

Mr.  H.  Kingsbury,  an  elder  from  the  Cleaveland 
churchj  said, — "  I  have  a  substantial  copy,  made  by  my- 
self, of  a  certificate  given  me  by  the  Pev.  S.  C.  Aikin, 
and  which  I  have  carried  for  two  years,  to  show  that  I 
am  an  elder.  I  got  it,  because  I  was  once  a  committee- 
man, and  sat  in  the  Assembly,  where  my  seat  was 
challenged." 

Mr.  Breckinridge. — "  Is  he  a  ruling  elder,  ordained 
according  to  the  Book  ?" 

Mr.  Kingsbury. — "  I  will  answer  no  questions.  I 
am  not  on  trial.'' 

Mr.  Breckinridge. — "  I  am  credibly  informed  that  he 
•never  was  an  elder ;  and  that  there  is  no  board  of  elders 
in  his  church.  I  ask  Mr.  Kingsbury  now,  if  he  ever 
adopted  the  Book  ?" 

Mr.  Kingsbury. — "  I  answer  no  questions." 

Subsequently,  Dr.  Peters  stated  that  Mr.  Kings- 
bury authorized  him  to  explain,  that  he  had  declined 
to  answer,  because  he  was  not  on  trial ;  but  that 
he  was  ordained  a  ruling  elder,  two  years  and  a  half 
ago. 

Mr.  Breckinridge. — "  AVill  Mr.  Kingsbury  now  sa}' 
whether  he  ever  adopted  the  Constitution  of  the  Pres- 
byterian Church?" 

ml 

Mr.  Kingsbury. — "  I  answer  no  questions." 
Mr.  Breckinridge. — "  That's  enough." 


THE    EEFORMI^'G   ASSEMBLY    OF    1837.  631 

After  an  able  discussion,  the  resolution  was  adopted, 
y  a  vote  of  132  to  105. 

I;  The  same  riile  was  subsequently  passed,  with  refer- 
nce  to  the  Synods  of  Utica,  Geneva,  and  Genesee,  by 

15  to  88. 

The  Assembly,  at  the  same  time,  recorded  that  -its 
,olicitude  on  the  subject  and  urgency  for  its  immediate 
iecision,  were  greatly  increased,  "  by  reason  of  the  gross 
lisorders  which  are  ascertained  to  have  prevailed  in 
hose  Synods ;  it  being  made  clear  to  us,  that  even  the 
:'lan  of  Union  itself  was  never  consistently  carried  into 
jffect,  by  those  professing  to  act  under  it."  It  declared 
'hat  it  had  no  intention  to  affect,  in  any  way,  the  stand- 
ing of  ministers  or  members,  as  such,  nor  the  mutual 
md  several  relations  and  duties  of  pastors  and  people; 
out  only  to  declare  their  relation  to  the  Assembly  and 
ihe  Presbyterian  Church. 

It  also  directed,  that  any  orderly  ministers  and 
[churches  which  might  be  within  the  bounds  of  the 
Four  disowned  Synods,  should  apply  for  admission  into 
l^uch  Presbyteries  belonging  to  our  connection  as  may 
be  most  convenient ;  and  that  any  orderly  Presbyteries, 
in  similar  circumstances,  report  themselves  to  the  next 
Assembly,  for  direction. 

The    elective    affinity    Presbytery  of    Philadelphia, 
which  had  been  the  occasion  of  so  much  controversy 
and   evil,  was  now  dissolved,  and  its  ministers,  licen- 
!  tiates,  and  churches  directed  to  apply  to  the  proper  sur- 
rounding Presbyteries  for  admission. 

Late  in  the  sessions,  the  committee  on  the  citation  of 
inferior  judicatories,  reported.  Its  chief  functions  had 
been  superseded  by  these  measures  of  the  Assembly. 


532  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

It,  however,  recommended  that  the  Synods  of  Albany,  y 
New  Jersey,  Michigan,  Cincinnati,  and  Illinois,  be  ad-  ^ 
nionislied  to  take  order,  respecting  errors  in  doctrine,  ij 
and  disorders,  which  were  charged,  by  common  fame, 
against  certain  of  their  Presbyteries,  and  to  report 
thereon  to  the  next  Assembly.  The  report  was  adopted. 

These  were  the  principal  measures  of  this  Assembly. 
The  testimony  of  the  Convention,  against  doctrinal 
errors,  and  violations  of  order,  was  also,  adopted; 
and  the  American  Education  and  Home  Missionary 
Societies  were  requested  to  cease  to  operate  within 
the  Church  ;  a  Board  of  Foreign  Missions  was  ap- 
pointed ;  and  a  pastoral  letter  to  the  churches,  and  a 
circular  letter  to  all  the  churches  of  Christ,  with  re- 
spect to  these  transactions,  were  issued.  Protests 
ao'ainst  these  various  measures  were  entered,  and  re- 
plies  made. 

In  the  protest  against  the  testimony  on  doctririal 
error,  the  minority  arrayed,  in  opposing  paragraphs, 
the  errors  condemned  by  the  Assembly,  and  the  doc- 
trines embraced  by  the  protestants.  The  profession  of 
faith  thus  presented  was,  on  some  essential  points,  am- 
biguous,  and,  on  others,  palpably  erroneous. 

The  Assembly  made  no  other  answer  to  this  paper 
than  to  require  the  attention  of  the  Presbyteries  to 
which  they  respectively  belonged,  to  the  avowals  thus 
made  by  the  subscribers  to  the  protest. 

Two  other  measures,  of  a  cautionary  nature,  were 
adopted.  To  guard  against  a  possible  policy,  the  clerks 
were  directed  to  enroll  no  newly-formed  Presbytery, 
until  it  shall  have  been  reported  to  the  Assembly  and 
recognized  by  it.     Should  it  appear  that  any  new  Pres- 


THE  REFORMING  ASSEMBLY   OF   1837.  533 

oytery  had  been  formed  with  a  view  to  unduly  increase 
the  representation,  the  Assembly  declared  that  it  would 
refuse  to  receive  its  commissioners,  and  might  order 
the  Presbytery  to  be  reunited  to  that  from  which  it  had 
been  taken. 

It  was  further  moved  to  require  of  the  Assembly's 
clerks,  the  Rev.  Drs.  J.  McDowell  and  J.  M.  Krebs,  a 
pledge  to  conform  their  action  to  the  regulations  at  this 
time  passed  by  it.  Those  officers  anticipated  the  adop- 
tion of  the  motion,  by  severally,  stating,  that,  as  they 
were  merely  administrative  officers,  they  held  them- 
selves bound  to  conform  strictly,  in  their  official  action, 
to  the  determinations  of  the  Assembly.  The  motion 
was,  thereupon,  withdrawn. 

j  Such  were  the  proceedings  of  this  Assembly,  which 
has  been  the  object  of  an  extraordinary  amount  of  oblo- 
quy and  reproach.  The  design  of  this  history  does  not 
permit  a  detailed  exposition  of  the  arguments  presented 
in  the  discussions,  and  the  various  incidents  of  the  pro- 
ceedings. But  one  remark  may  not  be  suppressed. 
Whether  estimated  by  the  number  of  eminent  and  vene- 
rable names  to  be  found  on  its  rolls,  by  the  peril  to  the 
cause  of  Christ  which  called  them  together,  the  diffi- 
culties and  embarrassments  with  which  they  were  called 
to  contend,  the  ability  of  the  discussions,  the  modera- 
tion and  prudence,  the  firmness  and  courage,  displayed, 
the  wisdom  and  fitness  of  the  measures  adopted,  or  the 
peace  and  prosperity,  for  so  many  years  enjoyed,  as  tlie 
blessed  results, — the  reforming  Assembly  of  1837  ranks, 
with  the  most  illustrious  of  the  faithful  councils  with 
which  God  has  blessed  his  Church.  Memory  fondly 
lingers  over  the  record  of  their  beloved  and  venerable 

45* 


534  HISTORY  or  the  new  school. 

names,  whilst  they  sleep  peacefully  in  the  dust.  It 
drops  a  tear  upon  the  recent  graves  of  an  Engles  and  a 
Junkin,  and  reverently  counts  up  the  three  or  four  who 
still  remain,  last  relics  of  the  former  age.  And  now,  a 
new  generation  has  arisen.  The  attempt  is  assiduously 
made  to  disparage  the  wisdom  and  fidelity  of  those  men 
of  God,  to  whom  our  Church  owes  such  a  debt  of  un- 
dying gratitude.  Men  whose  glory  it  once  was  to  shine 
in  their  reflected  light,  are  heard  with  patience,  whilst 
assuming  an  apologetic  tone,  on  behalf  of  those  great 
men  gone.  They  were  good  men,  indeed ;  but,  borne 
away,  by  the  excitement  of  the  time,  to  acts  of  unjusti- 
fiable violence  and  wrong !  Their  work  is  disparaged 
and  maligned.  All  the  arts  of  management  and  en- 
ginery of  excitement  are  brought  into  requisition,  to 
hurry  the  Church  into  a  temporary  forgetfulness,  and 
persuade  her  to  destroy  all  that  they  so  painfully  and 
prayerfully  wrought.  The  same  ambition  for  a  vast 
communion,  with  which  they  had  to  contend,  gives  im- 
petus to  the  present  movement ;  and  there  seem  to  be 
many  who  are  anxious  to  revive  and  restore  to  honor, 
those  latitudinarian  principles  and  that  Broad  Church 
policy,  which  they  cast  out  of  the  sanctuary,  as  unclean 
things. 

Who  can  witness  these  portentous  facts,  without 
emotions  of  alarm,  and  the  distressful  ejaculation  of  the 
bereaved  prophet  of  Israel. — my  "  father !  my  father ! 
The  chariot  of  Israel  and  the  horsemen  thereof!^' 

The  Assembly  of  1837  had  not  yet  adjourned,  when 
an  attempt  was  made  to  stigmatize  the  majority,  by  the 
pretence  that  it  was  acquired  by  a  corrupt  alliance  with 
the  South,  in  the  interest  of  slavery.     To  this  charge, 


THE  REFORMING  ASSEMBLY  OF   1837.  535 

the  answer  is  decisive.  The  agitation  of  the  slavery 
question,  in  connection  with  abolitionism,  was  then  new 
in  the  Church.  The  first  Assembly  which  took  action 
on  it,  subsequent  to  1818,  was  the  New  School  Assem- 
bly of  1836.  The  action  taken  by  it  was,  to  postpone 
indefinitely  the  whole  subject ;  and  that,  on  the  ground 
that  "  no  church  judicatory  ought  to  pretend  to  make 
laws,  to  bind  the  conscience,  in  virtue  of  their  own 
authority ;"  and  that  the  shortness  of  the  Assembly's 
sessions  rendered  it  "  impossible  to  deliberate  and  decide 
judiciously,  on  the  subject  of  slavery,  in  its  relations  to 
the  Church."  A  majority  of  the  affirmative  votes  on 
this  postponement  was  composed  of  members  who  voted 
for  the  acquittal  of  Mr.  Barnes.  In  the  Convention  of 
1837,  the  subject  came  up,  incidentally,  upon  occasion 
of  its  mention  in  a  paper,  communicated  to  the  body.  It 
elicited  no  action,  however,  and  seems  to  have  been  al- 
luded toby  none  but  Southern  members, — Mr.  Smyth  and 
Mr.  Plumer  expressing  the  opinion  that  the  Assembly 
ought  to  take  no  action  on  the  subject;  and  Mr.  Breck- 
inridge taking  the  ground  that  no  other  subject  should 
be  allowed  to  mix  itself  with  the  reform  of  the  Church ; 
and,  that,  on  the  one  hand,  the  spirit  of  abolitionism 
was  to  be  exceedingly  deprecated,  as  an  absorbing  and 
destructive  fanaticism ;  and,  on  the  other,  the  Assembly 
could  not  go  back  from  the  action  formerly  taken  on 
the  subject  of  slavery.  As  to  any  private  underetand- 
ing  or  compact,  there  is  not  a  trace  of  evidence  to 
sustain  it.  The  Rev.  Samuel  Steele,  of  Ohio,  was 
named  as  an  Old  School  abolitionist,  who  was  a  party 
to  the  pretended  covenant.  But  he  emphatically  and 
unreservedly  denied  the  charge.     The  Kev.  Thomas  D. 


536  HISTORY  OF  THE  NEW  SCHOOL. 

Baird  was  one  of  the  Secretaries  of  this  Convention, 
and  Vice  President  of  that  of  1838 ;  and  may  be  sup- 
posed to  have  been  in  the  confidence,  and  possessed  of 
any  secrets  of  the  Old  School.  He,  in  common  with 
all  the  other  members  of  the  Convention,  declared  his 
entire  ignorance  of  any  understanding,  whatever,  with 
respect  to  slavery.  In  fact,  no  such  arrangement  was 
made.  The  votes  of  the  Southern  commissioners  in 
the  Assembly  were  determined  by  other  causes,  already 
indicated ;  and  the  fact  that  the  Old  School  were  un- 
willing to  be  diverted,  by  the  question  of  slavery,  from 
the  great  issues  before  them,  and  that  the  New  School, 
who,  in  the  preceding  Assembly  had  avoided  this  sub- 
ject, were  anxious,  now,  that  the  South  was  lost  to 
them,  to  press  it  on  the  Assembly,  and  willing  to  see 
their  opponents  distracted  by  it,  needs  no  explanation. 


CHAPTER    XXXV. 

THE    DISRUPTION    OF    1838. 

New  School  meetings — Auburn  Convention — Ann  Arbor  Convention 
—"Opinions"  on  the  Disowning- Acts — Conventions  of  1838 — Plan 
of  the  New  School — Meeting  of  the  Assembly — Group  of  New 
New  School  leaders — Dr.  Patton's  motion — Dr.  Mason's  motion — 
Mr.  Squier — Mr.  Cleaveland's  paper — Dr.  Hill's  account — Dr. 
Beman  moderator  in  the  aisle — The  withdrawal — The  heralds — 
The  end  of  the  struggle — Four  successive  moderators — The  New 
School  stultify  themselves — Strength  of  the  parties — Doctrinal 
position  of  the  New  School — End  of  this  History. 

Upon  the  dissolution  of  the  Assembly  of  1837,  Dr. 
Beman  announced  that  a  meeting  of  the  minority  would 
be  held  in  Mr.  Barnes'  church,  on  the  next  afternoon, 
Friday,  the  9th  of  June.  At  this  meeting,  a  series  of 
resolutions,  submitted  by  the  Rev.  E.  Cheever,  were 
adopted.  These  resolutions  denied  that  there  were 
more  doctrinal  errors  prevalent  than  heretofore,  or 
greater  irregularities  in  the  disowned  Synods  than  in 
other  parts  of  the  Church.  They  declared  the  reasons 
insufficient  to  justify  the  measures  of  the  Assembly; 
and  pronounced  the  abrogation  of  the  Plan  of  Union, 
the  cutting  off  of  the  four  Synods  and  dissolution  of 
the  elective  affinity  Presbytery,  null  and  void.  They 
admitted  that  the  alienation  of  parties  in  the  Church 
was  such  as  to  render  a  division  probably  unavoidable ; 

537 


538  HISTORY   OF    THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

yet  recommended  all  the  New  School  Presbyteries  to 
be  fully  represented  hi  the  next  Assembly, — that  they 
"  claim  seats  for  the  commissioners  from  those  Presby- 
teries which  have  been  unconstitutionally  exscinded ; 
and  that,  in  case  their  seats  shall  be  denied  them,  said 
commissioners  take  immediate  measures  for  a  separate 
and  constitutional  organization  of  the  General  Assem- 
bly, as  constituting  the  only  true  General  Assembly 
of  the  Presbyterian  Church,  in  the  United  States  of 
America."* 

One  danger  threatened  this  policy.  For  several 
years,  the  Churches  of  Western  New  York  and  the 
Western  Reserve  had  displayed  a  strong  disposition  to 
withdraw  from  the  Church,  and  organize  themselves  as 
Congregationalists.  It  had  required,  heretofore,  the 
utmost  exertion  of  the  influence  and  tact  of  the  party 
to  prevent  a  step  so  disastrous  to  their  cause.  To 
obviate  such  a  course,  at  this  critical  moment,  the  meet- 
ing "  earnestly  requested"  the  churches  in  question,  "  to 
adhere  to,  and  maintain  their  present  organizations,  and 
firmly  to  resist  any  and  every  attempt  which  may  be 
made,  by  circular  letters  or  otherwise,  to  change  their 
present  ecclesiastical  relations."  The  allusion,  here, 
was,  to  circulars,  just  before,  issued,  by  certain  Congre- 
gational bodies,  which  had  been  organized,  recently,  in 
Western  New  York. 

The  chief  speakers,  at  this  meeting  were  appropriately 
selected.  They  were  Drs.  Beman  and  Peters,  and  the 
Rev.  Mr.  Oleaveland.  It  was  fitting,  that  ^Ir.  Cleaveland, 
whose  connection  with  the  Church  was  a  matter  of  mere 
temporary  convenience, — Dr.   Beman,  who   had   never 

*  See  the  proceediaigs  in  the  New  York  Observer,  1838,  pp.  94,  98. 


THE   DISRUPTION   OF    1838.  .  539 

taken  the  oatli  of  allegiance  of  a  Presbyterian  minister, 
and  whose  writings  were  in  open  antagonism  to  the  stand- 
ards of  the  Church, — and  Dr.  Peters,  whose  life  had  been 
publicly  devoted  to  the  destruction  of  our  Boards,  who  de- 
nied the  right  of  the  Assembly  to  organize  any  permanent 
agency,  whatever,  and  had  labored,  so  long  and  so  zeal- 
ously, to  cripple  and  destroy  the  Board  of  Missions, — 
should  be  the  men  to  originate  and  direct  this  scheme, 
which  proposed  to  seize  possession  of  the  Church  which 
had  so  long  borne  with  them,  and  assume  charge  of  the 
institutions  and  funds  which  had  been  organized  and  ac- 
cumulated, in  spite  of  their  opposition.  The  characteristic 
features  of  the  New  School,  from  its  origin,  had  been,  dis- 
like to  the  strictness  of  the  theology  of  the  Confession,  and 
to  the  system  of  government  therein  set  forth  ;  and  conse- 
quent coldness  or  hostility  to  the  seminaries  and  Boards 
of  the  Church,  and  preference  for  the  voluntary  societies 
and  seminaries.  The  latter,  therefore,  were  the  recipients 
of  their  gifts  ;  while  the  institutions  of  the  Church  were 
endowed  and  nourished  by  others.  The  New  School, 
therefore,  had  no  rightful  ground  for  any  pretence  to 
property  in  those  institutions.  In  the  conferences  of  the 
joint  committee  on  amicable  separation,  this  was  so 
clearly  recognized,  that  the  only  claim  which  the  New 
School  members  of  that  committee  made,  upon  the 
property  of  the  Church,  was,  to  one-half  of  some 
twenty  thousand  dollars  of  permanent  funds,  not  be- 
longing to  the  seminaries.  They  were,  also,  ready  to 
leave  the  chartered  name  of  the  Church  to  the  Old 
School,  and  not  anxious  to  retain  the  succession,  i)ro- 
vided  tlie  Old  School  would  allow  it  to  be  destroyed, 
and  not  claim  it  to  themselves. 


540  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

Yet  these  were  the  men,  who,  having,  deliberately  and 
of  purpose,  placed  their  own  seminaries  and  institutions 
beyond  the  reach  of  the  Church,  in  any  event,  now  form 
their  plans  and  announce  their  purpose,  to  seize  to  them- 
selves, alone,  her  name  and  succession,  her  funds  and 
seminaries,  her  Boards  and  all  her  institutions.  To  this 
end,  were  all  their  measures,  subsequently,  directed ;  at 
first,  in  ecclesiastical  conventions  and  the  courts  of  the 
Church,  and  then,  in  the  civil  tribunals  of  the  country. 

The  Philadelphia  minority  meeting  was  immediately 
followed  by  one  in  New  York,  wdiich  endorsed  the  resolu- 
tions passed  by  the  former.  Shortly  after,  a  call  appeared 
for  a  convention,  at  Auburn,  New  York,  on  the  17th  of 
August,  to  deliberate  on  the  proper  measures  to  be 
taken  '^  touching  our  grievances,  and  our  duty,  in  rela- 
tion to  them." 

At  the  time  indicated,  the  Auburn  convention  met, 
and  was  organized  by  appointing  the  Rev.  Dr.  James 
Richards,  President,  with  four  Vice  Presidents,  and  two 
Secretaries.  About  one  hundred  and  eleven  ministers, 
and  sixty  "  laymen"  were  in  attendance,  representing 
some  thii'ty-one  Presbyteries  and  thirteen  minorities. 
Most  of  these  were  from  the  disowned  Synods.  No 
regular  report  of  the  discussions  was  published.  They 
continued  until  Monday  the  21st,  when  the  convention 
finally  adjourned. 

Whilst  the  larger  proportion  of  the  members  were 
from  tne  disowned  Synods,  the  business  of  the  conven- 
tion was  managed,  mainly,  by  others,  whose  gr^at  labor 
it  was  to  induce  the  disowned  Synods  to  claim  seats  in  the 
next  Assembly.  A  decided  disposition  prevailed  among 
the  latter  to  abandon  the  attempt  to  revolutionize  the 


THE   DISRUPTION   OF    1838.  541 

Church,  and  to  enter  into  their  own  proper  Congre'ga- 
tional  affiliations, — a  disposition  to  which  appeal  was 
shortly  after  made  in  one  of  the  expected  ^^  Circulars/' 
from  the  General  Association  of  the  Congregational 
Ministers  in  New  York. 

With  a  view  to  this  point,  the  principal  resolutions 
of  the  convention  were  adopted.  These  declared  that 
the  disowning  acts  were  unconstitutional,  null  and  void  ; 
fhat  the  action  of  all  judicatories  "ought  to  be  directed 
to  the  preservation  of  the  union  and  intcrjrlty  of  the 
Presbyterian  Church/'  and  that,  "in  accordance  with 
these  principles,  it  be  recommended  to  the  Synods  de- 
clared to  be  exscinded,  %vith  their  Presbyteries  and 
churches,  to  retain  their  present  organization  and  con- 
nection, without  seeking  any  other ;  and  that  the  Presby- 
teries send  their  commissioners  to  the  next  General 
Assembly,  as  usual."* 

A  great  discovery  was  announced  by  this  Conven- 
tion,— that  the  churches  in  Western  New  York  did  not 
come  in  on  the  Plan  of  Union  of  1801,  but  under  the 
arrangement  made  with  the  Middle  Association,  in  1807 
and  1808.  It  was,  therefore,  assumed,  that  the  abrogation 
of  the  Plan  did  not  affect  these  churches.  Unfortu- 
nately for  this  conclusion,  the  history  shows,  as  we 
have  seen,  that  the  arrangement  of  1808  was  merely  an 
application  of  the  principles  of  the  Plan,  on  a  large 
scale ;  and  that  the  Plan  was  immediately  adopted,  by 
the  bodies  coming  in  under  that  arrangement,  as  their 
fundamental  constitution;  and  so  continued  and  was 
universally  recognized,  until  the  passage  of  the  disown- 
ing acts,  and  the  supposed  discovery  now  proclaimed. 

*  Minutes  of  the  Auburn  Convention,  pp.  36,  8vo.,  p.  7. 
46 


542  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL.  |||| 

The  convention  adopted  and  published  a  series  of  re- 
ports, (1)  upon  the  disowning  acts;  (2)  a  circular  letter, 
on  the  same  subject ;  (3)  a  Declaration  of  the  Rights  of 
Presbyterians ;  (4)  a  report  on  Doctrine,  in  which  the 
doctrinal  statement  of  the  minority  of  the  late  Assembly! 
was  embodied ;  and  (5)  a  statement  of  facts  relative  to' 
the  origin  and  character  of  the  churches  of  the  "  ex- 
scinded ''  Synods. 

In  the  discussion  on  these  subjects,  the  Rev.  Dr. 
Joseph  Penny  stated,  that  there  was  a  disposition  to 
suppress  the  facts;  that  there  was  much  more  reason 
for  the  charge  of  doctrinal  error  and  disorders,  than 
many  seemed  willing  to  admit.  Another  member, 
whose  disclosures  threatened  to  be  peculiarly  damaging, 
was  entreated  to  stoj) ;  but,  refusing  to  do  so,  he  was  in- 
duced to  yield  to  an  adjournment,  retaining  the  floor. 
When,  however,  the  convention  reassembled,  he  asked 
leave  of  absence,  and  desired  to  state  his  reasons  for 
the  request.  The  convention  would  not  listen  to  the 
reasons ;  but  granted  the  request ;  Avhereupon,  the  mem- 
ber took  his  seat  among  the  spectators^  and  continued  in 
attendance  till  the  adjournment  of  the  convention. 

A  similar  convention  of  the  Presbyterian  and  Con- 
gregational ministers  and  churches,  who  were  connected 
with  the  Presbvterian  Church  under  the  Plan  of  Union, 
was  held  in  the  end  of  August,  at  Ann  Arbor,  Michi- 
gan, with  like  objects  and  like  results.  While  the 
Stated  Clerk  of  the  Synod  of  the  Western  Reserve  was 
advising  the  Synod,  through  the  editorial  columns  of  the  .^ 
Ohio  Observer,  'Ho  declare  itself  an  independent  body,  J 
changing  its  name  perhaps  for,  Hhe  Western  Reserve 
General  Consociation,'  and  modifying  its  rules  as  cir-  i 


,.1 


THE   DISRUPTIOX   OF    1838.  543 

umstances    shall   seem    to   require,"    the   Presbyteries 

akiiig  like  change.-;, — the  convention  determined  "to 
etain  existing  relations,  for  the  present." 

In  the  mean  time,  the  appeal  of  the  New  School  to 
he  civil  tribunals  was  foreshadowed,  by  the  procuring 
knd  publishing  of  "  opinions"  from  various  gentlejnen 
of  legal  eminence,  against  the  constitutionality  of  the 
neasures  of  1837.     On  the  other  hand,  those  measures 

ere  very  ably  vindicated,  in  two  articles  in  the  Prince- 

n  Repertory, — in  a  review  of  the  Assembly's  proceed- 
ings, which  appeared  in  the  July  number;  and  an  arti- 
cle on  the  State  of  the  Church,  in  the  number  for  April, 
1838.     They  were  from  the  pen  of  Dr.  Hodge. 

As  the  time  for  the  meeting  of  the  Assembly  of  1838 
iapproached,  arrangements  were  made,  by  common  con- 
sent, for  a  conference  of  the  commissioners  who  were  pre- 
pared to  sustain  the  action  of  1837,  in  the  Seventh  Church, 
on  the  morning  of  Tuesday  the  loth  of  May,  two  days 
before  the  opening  of  the  Assembly.  A  "  meeting" 
was  also  called,  by  Drs.  McAuley,  Ricliards,  and  others, 
to  be  held  in  the  First  Church,  on  the  evening  of  Mon- 
day, the  14th. 

The  Old  School  Convention  of  1838  was  organized 
with  the  Rev.  Dr  Wm.  McPheeters,  President,  the  Rev. 
Thomas  D.  Baird,  Vice  President,  and  the  Rev.  Messrs. 
Ellas  W.  Crane,  and  Horace  S.  Pratt,  Clerks. 

On  the  evening  of  the  first  day's  sessions,  the  Con- 
vention was  waited  upon  by  a  committee  from  the  New 
School  "  Meeting  of  Commissioners."  They  commu- 
nicated a  series  of  resolutions,  which, — assuming  the 
unconstitutionality  of  the  disowning  acts,  and  making 
the  recognition  of  the  regular  standing  of  those  Synods 


544  HISTORY   OF    THE   NEW   SCHOO*L. 

a  fundamental  condition, — proposed  to  the  Convention 
"  to  open  a  friendly  correspondence,  for  the  purpose  of 
ascertaining  if  some  constitutional  terms  of  pacification 
may  not  be  agreed  upon." 

The  reply  of  the  Convention  was  drafted  by  a  com- 
mittee consisting  of  Dr.  Baxter,  Prof.  John  Maclean, 
of  Princeton,  and  Wm.  Maxwell,  Esq.,  of  Va.  It  de- 
clared the  idea  of  regarding  the  disowning  acts  as  uncon- 
stitutional, to  be  utterly  inadmissible,  and  that  the  firm 
maintenance  of  those  acts  and  the  connected  measures, 
presented  the  only  prospect  of  securing  the  peace  of  the 
Church. 

In  the  mean  time,  the  New  School  meeting  was  en- 
gaged, with  the  assistance  of  legal  counsel,  in  devising  a 
plan  by  which  to  seize  possession  of  the  charter  and  the 
Church.  Their  scheme  was  ingenious.  But  it  filled 
to  take  into  account  the  cardinal  fact,  tliat,  in  the  con- 
stitution and  laws  of  the  Church,  express  provision  is 
made  for  the  organization  of  the  Assembly^  designating 
precisely  the  officers  by  whom  it  is  to  be  accomplished, 
and  every  step  in  the  process. 

Ignoring  this  fact,  the  plan  devised  went  upon  the 
assumption,  that  the  assembled  commissioners  were  in 
the  predicament  of  a  popular  meeting,  dependent  for  its 
organization  upon  the  tact  of  such  leaders'  as  should 
most  promptly  seize  the  reins,  and  elicit  the  votes  of 
their  party ; — or,  at  best,  like  an  assembly  of  legislators, 
State,  or  National,  whose  only  official  assistant,  in  or- 
ganizing, is  a  clerk,  without  legal  authority,  and  liable 
to  be  superseded  at  any  moment,  by  the  will  of  the 
members. 

This  misconception  of  counsel,  "  learned  in  the  law," 


•     THE  DISRUPTION   OF   1838.  545 

but  ignorant  of  the  constitution  of  the  Church,  intro- 
duced confusion  and  perplexity  into  the  proceedings  of 
their  clients ;  ^  and  rendered  that  absurd,  which  was 
already  impossible. 

At  the  hour  api3ointed  for  0i3ening  the  Assembly,  the 
seats  near  the  pulpit  of  the  place  of  meeting,  the  Seventh 
Church,  located  in  Ranstead  Court, — were  filled  with 
the  Old  School  members.  They  had  been  informed, 
the  day  before,  by  Dr.  Nott,  of  Union  College,  of  the 
plan  of  the  New  School,  to  attempt  by  a  tumultuary 
movement  to  seize  upon  the  organization  of  the  Assem- 
bly; and,  therefore,  occupied  the  seats  immediately  in 
front,  for  the  purpose  of  protecting  and  sustaining  the 
moderator.  The  New  School  members  came  in,  together, 
from  the  meeting  in  the  First  Church.  They  assumed 
seats  in  the  body  of  the  house,  next  to  those  already 
filled  by  the  Old  School.  Foremost  among  them, 
was  a  group  of  eight  persons,  who  sat  in  the  middle 
aisle,  nine  or  ten  pews  from  the  front.  They  were  the 
master-spirits  of  the  occasion,  who  had  been  designated 
to  enact  the  leading  parts  in  the  drama  of  the  disrup- 
tion. First,  of  these,  in  place  and  responsibility,  Mr. 
Cleaveland,  was  most  appropriately  selected,  to  await 
the  critical  moment,  and,  with  hearty  good-will  and 
steady  hand,  strike  the  blow  which  should  rend  the 
Church.  A  year  or  two  afterward,  he  had  returned 
to  the  Congregational  Church,  from  which  he  came. 
\yith  him,  were  Dr.  Bcman,  the  veteran  strategist  of 
this  cause.  Dr.  Samuel  Fisher,  Dr.  Erskine  ]\Iason,  of 
Union  Theological  Seminary,  Dr.  William  Patton,  of 
the  Presbyterian  Education  Society,  and  the  Rev.  E. 
"W.  Gilbert,  author  of  the  diagram  illustrating  gradual 

46* 


546  HISTOEY   OF   THE   KEW  SCHOOL. 

regeneration  by  moral  suasion.  These  were  the  actors, 
designated  in  the  programme ;  and,  as  if,  to  complete 
the  dramatic  accuracy  and  fullness  of  the  arrangement, 
Drs.  Beecher,  of  Lane,  and  Taylor,  of  New  Haven,  who 
was  present  as  the  delegate  from  the  General  Associa- 
tion of  Connecticut,  sat  immediately  behind  Mr.  Cleave- 
land,  ready  at  the  moment  of  crisis,  to  stimulate  his 
failing  courage,  and  urge  him  on  to  his  appointed  office. 

Thus  curiously  were  brought  together,  as  the  con- 
spicuous objects,  at  a  moment  so  impressive,  and  in  atti- 
tudes so  significant,  a  complete  exemplification  of  the 
strange  conglomerate  which  was  about  to  usurp  the 
name  and  the  authority  of  the  Presbyterian  Church. 
In  Drs.  Patton  and  Mason,  the  voluntary  societies  and 
seminaries  w^ere  represented.  Moderate  orthodoxy  and 
Presbyterian  ism  recognized  an  honored  exemplar  in  Dr. 
Fisher ;  whilst  the  Edwardean  theology  of  Mr.  Gilbert 
and  Dr.  Beman,  the  Plan  of  Union  Presbyterianism  of 
the  latter,  the  Congregationalism  of  Mr.  Cleaveland 
and  the  Pelagianism  of  Dr.  Taylor,  all  contributed  to 
the  propriety  and  completeness  of  the  exhibition ;  and  the 
ambiguities  and  versatility  of  Dr.  Beecher,  his  catholic 
affinities  and  schemes  of  comprehension,  presented  a 
solvent,  to  fuse  and  cement  in  one  the  entire  mass. 

The  Constitution  provides  that  the  Moderator  of  the 
last  Assembly,  if  present,  "shall  open  the  meeting,  with 
a  sermon,  and  preside,  until  a  Moderator  be  chosen.''  In 
accordance  with  this  rule,  the  Rev.  Dr.  Elliott  opened  the 
Assembly  with  a  sermon  from  Isaiah  Ix.  1.  After  the 
sermon,  he  gave  the  usual  notice,  that  as  soon  as  the  bene- 
diction was  pronounced,  he  would  proceed  to  organize  the 
Assembly.     The  benediction  was  then  pronounced,  and 


THE  DISRUPTION   OF   1838.  5-47 

« 

the  Moderator  assumed  the  chair,  and  called  upon  the 
clerks,  who,  by  a  standing  rule,  were  constituted  the 
Committee  of  Commissions,  to  report  the  roll. 

At  this  moment,  Dr.  Patton  rose,  and  hastily  calling, 
"  Moderator  !  Moderator  V'  asked  leave  to  offer  certain 
resolutions,  which  he  held  in  his  hand.  The  Moderator 
declared  him  out  of  order,  as  the  first  business  was  the 
reporting  of  the  .roll.  Dr.  Patton  stated  that  the  reso- 
lutions had  reference  to  that  very  business.  But  the 
Constitution  expressly  provides  that  "  no  commissioner 
shall  have  a  right  to  deliberate  or  vote,  until  his  name 
shall  have  been  enrolled  by  the  Clerk,  and  his  commis- 
sion examined  and  filed  among  the  papers  of  the  As- 
sembly.'^ Until  the  report  of  the  Clerks,  therefore, 
neither  was  Dr.  Patton  competent  to  introduce  any 
business,  nor  was  there  a  house  to  act  upon  his  motion. 
The  Moderator,  therefore,  pronounced  him  out  of  order. 
Dr.  Patton  attempted  to  appeal.  But,  as  the  Moderator 
informed  him, — there  Avas  no  house  to  appeal  to.  The 
appeal  was,  therefore,  out  of  order;  and  Dr.  Patton 
took  his  seat.  The  manifest  propriety  of  the  Modera- 
tor's decision,  unexpected  though  it  seems  to  have  been, 
confounded  and  silenced  him ;  although  this  was  the 
l^recise  point  in  the  proceedings  when  the  learned  coun- 
sel had  instructed  them  that  these  resolutions  should  be 
acted  on,  in  order  to  accomplish  the  object. 

Dr.  Patton's  resolutions  were  condemnatory  of  the 
disowning  acts  of  1837,  and  proi)oscd  to  instruct  the 
Clerks  to  include  the  names  of  the  Commissioners  from 
the  disowned  Synods,  in  the  roll  of  the  Assembly.  It 
was  the  plan  of  the  New  School,  to  force  action  on  this 
subject,  before  the  organization ;  and,  upon  the  resolu- 


5^8  HISTOEY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

tions  being  rejected,  to  proceed  at  once  to  organize  the 
minority  as  the  Assembly,  thus  anticipating  the  regular 
organization  and  superseding  it.  Dr.  Patton's  failure 
introduced  confusion  into  the  whole  plan ;  which  was, 
thus,  already,  defeated. 

The  Permanent  Clerk,  now,  on  behalf  of  the  Com- 
mittee of  Commissions,  reported  the  roll  of  members, 
present  with  regular  and  orderly  commissions.  He, 
also,  reported  the  names  of  several  persons,  without,  or 
with  defective  commissions ;  and  the  case  of  commis- 
sioners present  from  tlie  Presbytery  of  Greenbriar, 
newly  organized,  by  the  Synod  of  Virginia.  With  the 
report,  the  documents  belonging  to  these  cases  were 
submitted  by  the  Clerk. 

The  Moderator,  thereupon,  announced  that  the  per- 
sons whose  names  had  been  enrolled  were  to  be  con- 
sidered as  members  of  the  Assembly ;  and  stated  that 
if  there  were  any  Commissioners  present,  who  had  not 
had  opportunity  of  submitting  their  commissions  to  the 
Committee,  they  could  now  present  them  to  the  Clerks 
and  be  enrolled. 

The  Rev.  Dr.  Erskine  Mason,  here,  rose  and  moved 
to  complete  the  roll,  by  adding  the  names  of  the  Com- 
missioners from  the  disowned  Synods,  who,  he  said, 
had  been  rejected  by  the  Clerks.  Their  commissions 
he  now  tendered  to  the  chair.  But  the  rule  under 
which  the  Moderator  was  acting  was  imperative.  "  The 
persons  whose  names  shall  be  thus  reported  shall  imme- 
diately take  their  seats  and  proceed  to  business.  The 
first  act  of  the  Assembly,  when  thus  ready  for  business, 
shall  be  the  appointment  of  a  Committee  of  Elections, 
whose  duty  it  shall  be  to  examine  all  informal,  and  uncon- 


THE   DISRUPTrON    OF    1838.  549 

stitntlonal  coniniissions,  and  report  on  the  same,  as  soon 
as  praeticable.'^*  The  design  of  the  jModcrator's  call 
was,  to  enable  the  Clerks  to  complete  their  report.  No 
other  business  might  interpose  between  that  report  and 
.  the  "  first  act"  provided  for  by  the  rule.  After  its  per- 
formance, the  house  would  be  ready  for  business,  and 
Dr.  Mason\s  motion  would  then  be  in  order.  The 
Moderator,  tlierefore,  pronounced  the  motion  of  Dr. 
Mason  "  out  of  order,  at  that  time."  Dr.  Mason  ap- 
pealed ;  but,  for  the  same  reason,  the  appeal  was  dis- 
allowed. The  Rev.  Miles  P.  Squier  now  arose  and 
tendered  a  commission,  and  claimed  a  seat,  as  a  member, 
from  the  Presbytery  of  Geneva.  The  Moderator  asked, 
if  the  Presbytery  belonged  to  the  Synod  of  Geneva; 
and  upon  being  answered  in  the  affirmative,  replied, — 
"  We  do  not  know  you,  sir." 

The  New  School  leaders  now  found  themselves  in  a 
very  embarrassing  position.  A  part  had  been  assigned 
them  to  perform.  The  last  moment,  when  its  perform- 
ance would  be  j^ossible,  was  passing.  And  yet  the  fact 
upon  which  it  had  been  predicated  had  not  occurred. 
Neither  the  Moderator  nor  the  Assembly  had  refused 
to  receive  the  "exscinded"  commissioners.  The  ques- 
tion had  been  excluded  by  a  strict  compliance  with  the 
.  Constitution  and  rules.  Evidently,  these  rendered  it 
impossible  to  force  upon  the  attention  of  the  Assembly, 
in  an  inchoate  and  unorganized  condition,  a  question 
so  grave  as  that  of  treating  as  a  nullity  a  solemn  decree 
of  a  former  Assembly.  After  the  Committee  of  Elec- 
tions has  been  appointed,  it  will  be  in  order  to  raise  the 
question  now  j^ressed.     But   the  ])ropriety,  then,  of  a 

*  Digest,  p.  295. 


550  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOLc 

reference  of  the  subject  to  that  committee  would  be  so 
evident  as  to  admit  of  no  question.  And  the  Assembly 
^vould  then  be  so  manifestly  and  fully  organized  that  an 
ittempt  at  a  tumultuary  supersedure  of  it  would  have 
3een  absurd. 

At  this  moment,  Mr.  Cleaveland  seems  to  have  been 
greatly  embarrassed  and  agitated.  His  countenance  was 
lushed  and  his  frame  trembled.  Apparently,  he  hesi- 
:ated,  and  held  a  hasty  conference  with  those  around 
tiim.  With  excited  countenances  and  eager  gestures, 
:he  voices  of  Drs.  Beecher  and  Taylor  were  heard  in  low 
3ut  earnest  tones  urging  him,  "  Go  on  !    Go  on  !" 

In  the  mean  time,  the  Rev.  Joshua  Moore,  of  the 
Presbytery  of  Huntingdon,  had  responded  to  the  Mod- 
erator's call,  and  presented  himself  to  the  Clerks,  for 
enrollment.  But  upon  examination,  finding  that  he  had 
eft  his  commission  at  his  lodgings,  he  left  the  house,  to 
procure  it.  A  motion  was  then  made,  for  the  appoint- 
nent  of  a  Committee  of  Elections.  But  the  question 
NSLS  interrupted. 

Mr.  Cleaveland  arose,  and  without  addressing  the 
VIoderator,  proceeded,  in  a  distinct,  but  trembling  voice, 
;o  read,  from  a  written  paper,  an  apologetic  preamble, 
riie  original  of  this  paper  was  afterward,  carefully  sup- 
pressed, as  were,  also,  the  written  affidavits  of  Mr. 
Illeaveland  and  Dr.  Beman,  as  to  this  transaction.  They 
/i^ere  in  possession  of  the  New  School  counsel,  on  the 
lubsequent  trial  before  judge  Rogers  ;  but  were  not 
sxhibited. 

On  the  Minutes  of  the  New  School  Assembly,  what 
)urported  to  be  "  the  substance''  of  Mr.  Cleaveland's 
)reamble  was  stated  in  these  words  :  "  As  the  commis- 


THE   DISRUPTION   OF    1838.  651 

sioners  to  the  General  Assembly  of  1838,  from  a  large 
number  of  Presbyteries  had  been  refused  their  seats; 
and  as  we  have  been  advised,  by  counsel  learned  in  the 
law,  that  a  constitutional  organization  of  the  Assembly 
must  be  secured  at  this  time  and  in  this  place,  he  trusted 
it  would  not  be  considered  as  an  act  of  discourtesy,  but 
merely  as  a  matter  of  necessity,  if  we  now  proceed  to 
organize  the  Assembly  of  1838,  in  the  fewest  words,  the 
shortest  time,  and  with  the  least  interruption  prac- 
ticable." 

He,  therefore,  moved,  that  Dr.  Beman  preside  till 
a  new  Moderator  be  chosen.  He  proj^osed  the  ques- 
tion, which  was  responded  to  by  a  vociferous  shout  of 
Aye  !  It  is  impossible  to  determine  from  the  testimony, 
amid  a  scene  of  excitement  and  confusion,  whether  upon 
this  or  any  subsequent  motion  in  the  process,  the  ques- 
tion was  reversed.  Several  of  the  New  School  witnesses 
testified  that  it  was,  and  that  there  were  negative  votes. 
On  the  contrarv,  the  New  School  Minutes  stated  that 
the  questions  were  unanimously  carried,  and  the  Old 
School  witnesses  declared,  that  they  heard  no  reversal,  nor 
time  allowed  for  it.  However,  amid  calls  to  order,  from 
the  Moderator  and  members,  Mr.  Cleaveland  put  the 
question  and  pronounced  Dr.  Beman  elected, — the  Old 
School  members  sitting  in  indignant  silence.  Says  Dr. 
Hill, — "I  had  determined  to  take  no  part,  and  was  op- 
posed to  the  proceeding  from  the  first.  I  expected  a 
riot  would  ensue.  When  Mr.  Cleaveland  made  the 
motion,  that  Mr.  Beman  should  take  the  chair,  lie  put 
the  affirmative, — ^  All  those  who  are  in  favor  will  say, 
aye.'  There  arose  a  simultaneous  burst  of  ayes,  some 
of  which  were  very  indecorously   and    offiinsively  loud. 


552  HISTORY   OF   THE    NEW   SCHOOL. 

I  don't  know  that  all  the  scattering  ayes  had  ceased, 
when  he  reversed  it.  I  heard  a  few  scattering  noes, 
only  from  the  direction  of  the  Old  School.  I  was  as- 
tonished at  this,  because  I  expected  a  thundering,  ^  No  !' 
as  they  claimed  to  be  the  majority.  I  had  expected  that 
the  noes  would  be  of  another  character,  and  was  agree- 
ably disappointed.  I  had  anticipated  these  events,  and 
feared  that  a  great  riot  would  take  place."  * 

Dr.  Beman  assumed  his  imaginary  chair,  by  stepping 
out  of  the  pew,  and  standing  in  the  aisle.  A  general 
movement  now  took  place  in  that  part  of  the  house, 
the  members  rising,  mounting  the  seats,  and  even 
standing  on  the  backs  of  the  pews,  as  the  only  way  in 
which  they  could  command  a  view  of  the  new  Modera- 
tor, amid  a  crowd  on  the  floor.  At  the  same  time,  the 
excitement  was  transmitted  to  the  crowded  galleries 
and  the  spectators  below,  whose  interest,  on  both  sides, 
was  expressed  with  less  regard  to  decorum  than  that  of  the 
members.  Amid  such  a  scene,  however,  the  Old  School 
members  onlv  caao;ht  the  sound  of  successive  affirmative 
responses  to  questions  which  they  could  not  hear.  In 
a  few  moments,  the  throng  which  had  clustered  about 
Dr,  Beman,  changed  its  position  to  one  about  twenty 
feet  farther  from  the  pulpit  and  the  Moderator's  chair ; 
and,  some  five  minutes  after  the  rising  of  Mr.  Cleave- 
land,  they  retired  from  the  house. 

At  this  instant,  another  pair  of  actors  presented  them- 
selves for  a  moment,  to  give  a  fitting  ending  to  the 
scene.  Dr.  Edward  Beecher,  and  the  Rev.  Eliakim 
Phelps,  agent  for  the  Presbyterian  Education  Society,— ;- 

*  Dr.  Hill's  testimony,  in  Miller's  Eeport,  p.  212.     Dr.  Hill  identi- 
fied himself  with  the  New  School. 


i) 


THE   DISRUPTION   OF    1838.  553 

Congregational  sojourners,  both, — appeared  at  the  sev- 
eral doors  of  the  house,  the  heralds  of  the  pageant,  and 
announced  to  the  members  in  stentorian  voices,  that  the 
Assembly  had  adjourned,  to  meet  immediately  in  the 
First  Presbyterian  Church !  One  of  the  gentlemen 
was  a  little  hoarse,  and  his  first  effort  being  not  quite 
satisfactory,  he  cleared  his  throat,  and  repeated  the 
proclamation,  in  tones  which  left  no  room  for  any  to 
plead  ignorance. 

And  so,  the  anxieties  and  controversies  of  a  quarter  of 
a  century  were  ended  !  The  withdrawal  of  that  mixed 
company  from  the  house  in  Ranstead  Court,  was  the 
retirement  of  the  foreign  and  disturbing  elements  from 
the  Church.  The  spirit  of  rest  and  peace  breathed  his 
influences  upon  the  hearts  of  the  members ;  and  with 
mingled  emotions,  — tears  trickling,  from  many  faces, 
yet  profoundly  grateful  for  a  great  deliverance,  the 
Assembly  resumed  its  interrupted  business.  A  Com- 
mittee of  Elections  was  appointed ;  and  Dr.  Plumer  was 
elected  Moderator  and  the  Rev.  E.  W.  Crane  Tempor- 
ary Clerk. 

The  next  day,  it  appeared  that  after  the  call  of  Dr. 
Beman  to  the  chair.  Dr.  Fisher  had  been  chosen  Mode- 
rator, and  Dr.  Mason  and  Mr.  Gilbert,  Temporary 
Clerks,  and  then,  respectively.  Stated  and  Permanent 
Clerks.  Thus,  the  energies  of  four  successive  Modera- 
tors had  been  called  into  requisition  with  a  magic  prompt- 
ness and  facility,  to  get  the  "  constitutional  Assembly" 
upon  its  feet ; — Dr.  Elliott, — the  only  constitutional  fea- 
ture in  the  case, — by  whose  mandate  the  Assembly  was 
convened  and  opened  ;  Mr.  Cleaveland,  wlio,  self-elected, 
gave  place  in  a  few  moments,  to  Dr.    Beman,  as  he, 

.     47 


654  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

again,  after  two   or  three  minutes'  incumbency,  to  Dr. 
Fisher. 

After  the  organization  of  the  body  had  been  thus 
completed,  and  the  adjournment  had  taken  place  to  the 
First  Church,  the  seceding  Assembly  took  up  and 
adopted  Dr.  Patton's  paper.  In  it,  they  declared,  that 
'^  the  Assembly  cannot  be  legally  constituted,  except  by 
admitting  to  seats,  and  equality  of  powers,  in  the  first 
instance,  all  Commissioners  who  present  the  usual  evi- 
dence of  their  appointment ;  and  that  it  is  the  duty  of 
the  clerks,  and  they  are  hereby  directed,  to  form  the 
roll  of  the  Assembly  of  1838,''  by  including  the  com- 
missioners from  the  exscinded  Synods  and  the  dissolved 
Third  Presbytery  of  Philadelphia. 

They  had  just  pretended  to  supersede  the  regular  or- 
ganization of  the  Assembly,  because  Dr.  Elliott  had  re- 
fused to  entertain  this  question,  "  in  the  first  instance J^ 
And  now,  after  completing  their  own  organization,  with- 
out the  essential  enrollment  of  these  members,  they 
stultify  themselves,  by  declaring  that  an  organization 
cannot  take  place  till  after  such  enrollment,  and  there- 
fore order  it  to  be  made,  now  that  the  Assembly  is 
already  organized ! 

After  the  retirement  of  the  New  School,  and  the  com- 
pletion of  the  organization  of  the  Assembly  in  Pan- 
stead  Court,  the  roll  was  called  and  it  was  found  that  of 
the  220  commissioners  who  had  been  enrolled,  1 52  were 
present  and  answered  to  their  names ;  and  5  were  at  the 
moment  out  of  the  house ;  but  afterward  appeared  and 
acted  with  the  Assembly.  Four  additional  commis- 
sioners afterward  arrived  and  reported  themselves, 
whilst  two  of  those  who  answered  at  the  calling  of  the 


THE   DISRUPTION   OF    1838.  555 

roll,  afterward  declined  to  recognize  either  Assembly. 
So  that  the  whole  number  acting  with  the  Assembly 
was  159. 

The  New  School  Minutes  exliibit  the  names  of  287 
Commissioners.  But  these  include  157  of  those  who 
were  in  attendance  on  the  Assembly  in  Ranstead  Court, 
the  2  neutrals  who  were  there,  5  neutrals  who  went 
home,  and  2  commissioners  who  were  not  in  Philadel- 
phia at  all;  leaving,  thus,  121  in  actual  attendance  on 
the  New  School  Assembly.  These  included  58  Com- 
missioners from  the  disowned  Synods,  and  Third  Pres- 
bytery of  Philadelphia.  Thus,  in  the  united  attend- 
ance on  the  two  Assemblies,  the  Old  School  had  a  clear 
majority  over  the  New  of  38  ;  and  of  31  over  New 
School  and  neutrals  combined. 

"VVe  have  seen  that  the  division  grew  out  of  doctrinal 
diversities.  The  Nev/  School  Assembly  hastened  to 
define  its  position  on  that  subject.  In  1839,  it  i)ublished 
"  A  Declaration,  setting  forth  the  present  position  of  our 
beloved  Zion,  and  the  causes  which  have  brought  us 
into  our  peculiar  position."  This  paper  purports  to 
give  a  history  of  the  subject ;  but  it  is  a  tissue  of  ex- 
traordinary inaccuracies.  The  reader,  however,  is  pos- 
sessed of  the  means  of  their  correction,  in  these  pages. 

*^  It  will  be  found,"  say  they,  "  upon  a  reference  to 
the  history  of  bygone  days,  that,  on  the  6th  day  of 
April,  1691,  the  Presbyterian  and  Congressional  de- 
nominations of  Christians  in  Great  Britain  met  at  Step- 
ney, and  there,  by  tlie  blessing  of  Almighty  God,  after 
talking  over  their  diiferences  and  agreements,  consum- 
mated a  union  of  the  two  denominations,  by  adopting 
what  was  then  called,  ^  the  Heads  of  Agreement,'  em- 


556  HISTORY   OF   THE   NEW   SCHOOL. 

bracing  a  few  cardinal  principles,  which  were  to  govern 
them  in  their  fraternal  intercourse. 

'^  The  Presbyterian  and  Congregational  Union  sent 
over  one  of  their  number,  by  the  name  of  Makemie,  as 
a  missionary  to  the  new  settlements  in  America ;  who, 
in  connection  with  Messrs.  Macnish,  Andrews,  Hamp- 
ton, Taylor,  Wilson,  and  Davis,  in  1704,  formed  the 
first  Presbytery  which  ever  existed  in  America,  by  the 
name  of  the  Presbytery  of  Philadelphia.  This  mother 
Presbytery  was  formed  upon  the  liberal  Christian  prin- 
ciples which  governed  the  London  Association,  by  which 
Mr.  Makemie  was  sent  to  this  country,  and  was  com- 
posed, partly  of  Presbyterian,  and,  partly,  of  Congrega- 
tional, ministers  and  churches.  Mr.  Andrews,  the  first 
pastor  of  the  Metropolitan  or  First  Church  in  Phila- 
delphia, was  a  decided  Congregational  Presbyterian ; 
and  the  church  over  which  he  presided  was  under  the 
care  of  the  Presbytery  sixty-four  years,  before  they 
elected  any  ruling  elders.  This  state  of  things  con- 
tinued until  1716,  when  the  Synod  of  Philadelphia  v/as 
formed  out  of  the  Presbyteries  of  Philadelphia,  New 
Castle,  Snow  Hill,  xind  Long  Island ;  the  last  three 
having  grown  up,  after  the  formation  of  the  first,  in 
1704.'' 

The  "  Declaration"  traces  the  history  down  to  the 
Adopting  Act.  But,  under  that  name,  it  exhibits  the 
Preliminary  Act ;  whilst  the  Adopting  Act  itself  is  en- 
tirely ignored.  It  asserts  that  the  "  rash  departure"  of 
the  Synod,  in  the  Explanatory  Act  of  1736,  '^  from  the 
tolerant  and  fraternal  principles  of  1691,  in  England, 
and  of  1704  and  1729,  in  America,  led  to  the  painful 
schism  of  1741."     This,  however  was  healed,  in  1758, 


THE  DISEUPTION  OF   1838.  557 

when  the  two  Synods  were  reunited,  and  in  the  sixth 
article  of  their  union,  they  agreed  to  adopt  t}ie  Con- 
fession of  Faith,  Catechisms  and  Directory,  '^as  tliey  had 
been  adopted,  in  1728."*  It  then  relates  the  history  of 
correspondence  with  the  Congregational  Churches,  and 
of  the  Plan  of  Union  ;  of  which  it  says  : — 

"These  Plans  of  Union  between  the  two  denomina- 
tions, were  a  virtual  recognition  of  the  benign  principles 
established  in  1691,  in  England,  and  afterward  adopted 
in  America,  and  made  the  basis  of  Presbyterianism  in 
the  original  Presbytery  and  Synod  of  Philadelphia. 

"  These  fundamental  principles  continued  to  be  recog- 
nized and  acted  upon  by  the  Assembly  of  the  Presby- 
terian Church,  and  the  subordinate  judicatories,  with 
few  exceptions,  until  1837."t 

The  "  Declaration"  goes  on  to  give  an  account  of  the 
transactions  of  1837  and  1838,  and  the  commencement 
of  legal  proceedings,  designed,  say  they,  if  possible  to 
restore  the  purity  of  the  Church,  "  and  secure  religious 
liberty." 

In  a  word,  the  division  grew  out  of  the  question 
whether  the  Preliminary  Act  of  1729,  erroneously  called 
the  Adopting  Act,  was  the  fundamental  constitution  of 
the  Church.  The  issue  was  between  the  standards  of 
the  Church,  and  the  "liberal  principles"  of  1691.  The 
same  issue  is  now  anew  2:)resented  to  our  Church. 

Here  we  pause,  leaving  it  to  another  occasion,  should 
the  Head  of  the  Church  graciously  bestow  the  necessary 
leisure,  to  develope  more  fully  the  history  here  briefly 
sketched,  in  some  of  its  aspects ;  and  trace  the  results  of 

*  See  the  Articles,  above,  pp.  115, 116. 
t  Moore's  "  New  Digest,"  p.  549. 
47* 


658  HISTORY  OF  THE  NEW  SCHOOL. 

the  measures  of  1837  and  1838  ;  the  acts  of  the  latter  year 
for  the  pacification  of  the  Church ;  the  separation  of 
the  elements  throughout  the  ecclesiastical  limits ;  the 
proceedings  at  law ;  the  charge  of  Judge  Rogers  and 
finding  of  the  jury,  and  the  final  triumph  of  truth  and 
righteousness,  in  the  decision  of  the  Supreme  Court  of 
Pennsylvania,  in  Bank,  as  set  forth  in  the  opinion  of 
Chief  Justice  Gibson.  It  declared  the  disowning  acts 
to  be  "certainly  constitutional  and  strictly  just,^^ — 
that  "  the  Commissioners  from  those  Synods  were  not 
entitled  to  seats  in  the  Assembly,  and  that  their  names 
were  properly  excluded  from  the  roll ;" — that  "  an 
appeal  from  the  decision  of  the  Moderator  did  not  lie ; 
and  he  incurred  no  penalty  for  disallowing  it ;" — "  that 
the  Assembly  which  met  in  the  First  Presbyterian 
Church  was  not  the  legitimate  successor  of  the  Assem- 
bly of  1837 ;  and  that  the  [Old  School]  defendants  are 
not  guilty  of  the  usurpation  with  which  they  are 
charged,''  in  claiming  the  succession. 

The  blessings  of  thirty  years  have  crowned  the  works 
of  our  fathers,  and  experience,  in  all  those  years,  has 
attested  the  wisdom  of  their  policy,  and  the  manifest 
approval  of  the  Head  of  the  Church,  through  it,  en- 
dowing her  with  prosperity  and  peace. 


1 


INDEX. 


Ability  and  obligation,  p.  219,  222. 

Act;  Adopting,  70,  71,  103,  105,  106, 

109,  111,  115,  116,  121,  122,  130, 

556;  motives  for  it,  59,  60,  61;  ex- 

^       plained,   S3,    87,    106;     anxieties, 

J  60,  6-4,  65 ;  opposition,  66 ;  en- 
forced, 83,  85,  101 ;  overture  for 
it,  61 ;  Preliminary  Act,  68,  70,  87, 
88,  90,  92,  140,  556. 

Act,  on  intrusions,  99 ;  on  literary 
examination,  99. 

Act  and  Testimony,  422;  its  influ- 
ence, 427,  430,  435;  opposition  to 
it,  427. 

Adams,  Letterof  John,  to  Morse,  150. 

African  school,  249. 

Alexander,  Rev.  Dr.  A.,  242,  245, 
285,  286,  304,  404,  459,  512. 

Alexander,  Rev.  Dr.  J.  W.,  509,  510. 

AndoverSeminary,  185,199,  211,333. 

Andrews,  Rev.  Jedidiah,  47,  48,  49, 
50,  55,  60,  65,  67,  70,  80,  102,  274. 

Ann  Arbor  Convention,  542. 

Antinoniianism  charged  on  the  Old 
School,  4. 

Aiian  apostasy  in  England,  34. 

Assembly,  erected  in  1788,  124;  its 
powers,  125,  129;  of  1814,  256;  of 
1817,  246,  259.  263;  of  1826,  260, 
263;  of   1827,267;  of   1828,  313 
of    1830,322;  of   1831,  270,   357 
376,  392,  453 ;  of  1832,  393,  456 
of  1833,  395;  of  1834,  399,   404 
of  1835,  435;  of  1836,  480,  489 
of  1837,    516,  533;  of  1838,  537 
of  1866,  2;  of  1867,  4;  of  1868,  10. 

Associations  and  Consociations,  the 
difference,  145,  157. 

Atonement;  younger  Edwards  on, 
177;  Beman  on,  364. 

Auburn,  Theological  Seminary,  292 ; 
Convention,  540. 


Bacon,  Rev.  Leoxard,  on  Barnes' 
ease,  363,  372. 

Baird,  Rev.  Thomas  D.,  ix.,  257, 
262,  268,  364,  383,  388,  390,  391, 
4.32,  454,  456,  459,  516,  525,  527, 
536,  543 ;  the  Pittsburgh  overture, 
263 ;  on  the  W.  F.  M.  S.  and  the 
A.  B.  C.  F.  M.,  459 ;  on  the  N.  S. 
plans  of  1837,  527. 

Balch's  ease,  131,  255,  257,  294. 

Baltimore  Presbytery  and  Foreign 
Missions,  448,  450. 

Barnes,  Rev.  Albert,  344 ;  First  pro- 
ceedings against,  345;  his  arti- 
cles of  faith,  348  ;  charges  not  al- 
lowed, 351,  355;  his  sermon  con- 
demned, 354  :  committee  to  confer, 
354  ;  array  in  his  support,  346,  357, 
360,362;  they  evade  the  doctrinal 
questions,  352,  353,  354 ;  case  in 
the  Assembly,  366,  409 ;  New  Ua- 
ven  on  it,  362;  Mr.  Bacon,  372; 
effect  of  his  acquittal,  418. 
Second  trial,  475:  holds  the  Con- 
fession, as  a  "  system,"  480  ;  views 
on  Adam's  headship,  484. 

Barrier  Act,  126,  129. 

Baxter,  Rev.  Richard,  23,  29,  142; 
his  "  Middle  way,"  27,  36,  142. 

Baxter,  Rev.  Dr.  G.  A.,  516,  523, 
525  ;  and  the  Disowning  Acts,  528. 

Beecher,  Rev.  Dr.  L.,  337,  403,  409, 
467;  and  New  Haven,  186,  187, 
199,  203,  216,  234,  256. 

Beecher,  Rev.  Dr.  Ed.,  189,  337,  472, 
552. 

Belfast  Society,  56,  57. 

Beman,  Rev.  Dr.  N.  S.  S.,  229,  234, 
272,  36],  363,  369,  395,  409,  524, 
525,  528,  537,  538,  545,  546;  550, 
551,  552,  553. 

Benion's  Neonomiauism,  27. 

55d 


560 


INDEX. 


Bissell,  a  "  committee-man,"  260. 

Blackburn,  Rev.  Dr.  John,  295,  306. 

Blair,  and  the  Adopting  Act,  91,  123; 
on  the  state  of  religion,  96. 

Blythe,  Rev.  Dr.  Jas.,  432,  433,  516. 

Boards ;  Assembly's  power  denied, 
495  ;  attempts  upon,  316,  321,  322, 
324,  359,  377,  378,  419,  497;  pro- 
posed consolidation  with  New 
School,  5,  9. 

Books  and  publications;  censure  of, 
118,  132,  137,  354;  the  right  de- 
nied, 352,  411 ;  affirmed,  352,  439. 

Bourn's  Catechisms,  31,  33. 

Brainard's  Mission,  276. 

Breckinridge,  Rev.  Dr.  John,  292, 
448,  450,  454,  478,  498,  505,  514. 

Breckinridge,  Rev.  Dr.  R.  J.,  12, 
371,  392,  394,  422,  427,  428,  517, 
525,  527,  530. 

Cambridge  Platform,  23, 143,  144. 
Carolinas  Synod's  Missions,  279, 307. 
Cartesian   philosophy    of   Edwards, 

167. 
Chambers'  case,  261. 
Chase,  Rev.  Moses,  and  the  Board  of 

Education,  271. 
Church  a  missionary  society,  51,  273, 

275,  276,  449. 
Cincinnati;  Missionary  Convention, 

380;    Presbytery,    3*36,   322,    361, 

403. 
Circular   letter,   "Secret,"    of   1831, 

387  ;  of  1836,  506 ;  Dr.  Beman's, 

395  :  Dr.  Peters',  320. 
Citation  of  inferior  courts,  524,  531. 
Cleaveland,   Rev.  John  P.,  538,  545, 

550. 
Clerks  of  1837  and  the  roll  of  1838, 

533. 
Committee    of    correspondence;    of 

1831,  388;  of  1836,  505. 
Committee-men,  156,  258,  260,  270, 

271,  366,  530. 
Compromising  plan,  409,  419,  420. 
Compromises,  on  missions,  313,  379; 

on  Barnes'  case,  367;  on  the  Elec- 
tive Affinity  Courts,  442,  478. 
Concio  ad  Clerum,  Taylor's,  191. 
Conference;  of   1833,   416,  421;  of 

1836,  502,  504. 
Confession,  revised,  125,  130;  abbre- 

via'ted,  257,  340.  See  Subscription. 
Congregational  churches;  origin,  23, 

143;   intercourse    with,   148,   152, 


153,  248,  261,  434,  445,  507, 
523. 

Congregationalism.  Its  origin,  23, 
24,  37,  143. 

Congregationalists ;  vote  in  the  As- 
sembly, 133,  153,  261,  262;  in- 
clined to  leave  the  Church,  538, 

.  540,  542. 

Constitution  revised,  124. 

"  Constitutional  Assembly"  self-con- 
demned, 554. 

Contumacy  of  Elective  Affinity  and 
Wilmington  Presbyteries,  478,  499, 
501. 

Convention  ;  of  the  American  Epis- 
copate, 151 ;  of  1785,  120  ;  of  mis- 
sions of  1831,  381;  Western  of 
1833,  406;  of  1835,  432;  of  1837, 
516;  of  1838,  543;  of  Auburn, 
540  ;  of  Ann  Arbor,  542. 

Cornbury  and  Makemie,  41,  43. 

Correspondence  for  union  of  Old  and 
New  Sides,  111. 

Cotton's  Book  of  the  Keys,  143. 

Cowell  and  Tennent,  116. 

Cox,  Rev.  Dr.  S.  H.,  xi.,  237. 

Craighead,  Rev.  Alex.,  91. 

Craighead,  Rev.  T.  B.,  138. 

Creeds  and  subscription,  32. 

Cumberland  schism,  133,  136. 

Davies,  Rev.  Samuel,  26. 

Davis,  AV.  C,  136,  276. 

"  Declaration,"  New  School,  of  1839, 
556. 

Delaware  Synod,  401,  442. 

Dickinson,  and  subscription,  66,  67, 
78,  80,  and  the  New  Side,  104,  110. 

Dilatory  policy ;  in  Barnes'  case, 
352,  475,  476,  477 ;  in  Duffield's, 
466  ;  in  Beecher's,  469. 

Discipline  resorted  to,  462. 

Disinterested  benevolence,  170,  176, 
177,  244,  246. 

Disowning  Acts,  529,  531. 

Doctrinal  errors ;  caused  all  the 
trouble,  518;  taught,  by  Baxter, 
27;  by  Harker,  119;  Balch,  132; 
Craighead,  134,  138;  W.  C.  Davis, 
137  ;  New  England  theology,  174; 
younger  Edwards,  177 ;  New  Ha- 
ven, 181,  184;  Fitch,  189;  Taylor, 
192,  195;  Finney,  218;  Beman, 
363;  Duffield,  463,  467;  Edward 
Beecher,  Sturdevant,  and  Kirby, 
473;  Barnes,  345,  348,  354, 376, 484. 


INDEX. 


561 


Dow's  impeachment  of  Taylor,  207. 
Drummond  and  Makcmie,  38,  40. 
Duffitld,    Rev.    Geo.,   409,    Sdl  :    On 

Regeneration,  463  ;  errors  charged 

463.J  his  trial,  465. 

East  Windsor,  205,  210. 
Education,  ministerial,  99,  276,  281. 

Am.   Soc.  223,  327;  its  branches, 

328. 

Presb.  Soc.  of  N.  Y.,  285,  328,  332, 

333,  and  the  Board,  49S. 

Presb.  Soc,  of  Philada..  284. 

Board,  288,  290  :  attempts  to  de- 
stroy it,  497,  528. 
Edwards;  and  New  England  theol- 

ogv,  167,  170,  176,  214;  and  Hop- 
kins, 173. 
Edwards  the  younger,  155,  177,  364. 
Elective   AtSnity   Presbj'^tery.      The 

name,  394,  439  ;  history.  369,  392, 

439:  condemned,  414,  430. 
Elliot.' the  Indian  apostle,  22. 
Elliott,   Rev.   Dr.   David,   436,   442, 

522,  546. 
Ely,  Rev.  Dr.  E.  S.,  235,  256,  291, 

316,  346,  347,  348,  351,  361,  39.3, 

442,  478  ;  his  "  Contrast,"  236. 
Engles,   Rev.  Dr.  W.   M.,  345,  354, 

355,  361,  398,  428. 
Episcopate,  American,  149. 
Errors,  doctrinal.     See  Testimonies, 

and.  Doctrinal  Errors. 
Essential   and   non-essential,  69,  79, 

112,  115, 
Examination    of    intrant   ministers, 

6,  410,  411,  436  ;  proposed  reunion 

basis,  7,  9. 
"Exscision,"  New  School  plans,  527. 

Fatalism  charged  on  Old  School,  4. 

Finney,  Rev.  C.  G.  ;  on  revivals,  217  ; 
on  regeneration,  218  ;  on  new  mea- 
sures, 225  ;  style  of  preaching, 
231  :  account  of  parody  on  origi- 
nal sin,  488. 

Fisher,  Rev.  Dr.  R.,  443,  546,  553. 

Fitch,  on  Sin,  189,  191. 

Eraser.  Rev.  Wm.  J.,  472,  474. 

Fund  for  pious  uses,  274^   - 

Genesee  Synod,  161,  531. 
Geneva  Synod,  161,  531. 
Gibson,  Opinion  of  Judge,  558. 
Gilbert,     Rev.     E.    W.,     545,    546, 
553. 


Glasgow  University,  ministers  from, 

38,  53. 
Goodrich's  Lecture  in  Yale,  185. 
Gray,  Rev.  Wm.,  242,  245,  246. 
Great  awakening,  97. 
Green,    Rev.    Dr.  Ashbel,    281,  285, 

302,  346,   354,  359,  361,  307,  398, 

422. 
Griffin,  Rev.  Dr.  Edward,  240,  243, 

250,  251. 

Halt/'s  resolution  on  reunion,  14,  18. 
Harker's  case,  118. 
Hawes  correspondence,  201,  350. 
Hends  of  Agreement,  24,  26,  32,  145, 

5^5. 
Henry,  Rev.  Matthew,  and  Benion,30. 
Heralds  of  1838,  552. 
lleres}'.  The  word,  in  charges  tabled, 

466,  477. 
Heresies  taught.  See  Doctrinal  Error. 
Herron,  Rev.  Dr.  Francis,  267,  268. 
Hickok,  Rev.  Dr.,  and  the  basi-s  of 

reunion  of  1868.  11. 
"  Highland  host,"  39. 
Hill.  Rev.  Dr.  Wm.,  435,  551. 
Hillyer,  Rev.  Dr.  Asa.  378,  419. 
Historical  sense  of  adojjtion    of  the 

Confession,  4. 
Hodge,  Rev.  Dr.  C,  14,  422,  543. 
Hoge,  Rev.  Dr.  James,  436. 
"  Holy  band,"  230. 
Hopkins,  Rev.  Samuel,  173. 
Hopkinsianism,   131,  13.3,  171,  173, 

235,  247;  in  N.  Y.,  237;  in  Phila. 

Synod,  241 ;  in  Tennessee,  294. 

Illinois  College,  472. 

Imputation;  Barnes  on,  351;  Ed- 
wards on,  169;  New  Haven  on, 
190;  Andover,  211. 

Independents,  English,  20,  21,  24;  in 
Westminster  Assembly,  141. 

Indian  Missions,  276. 

Infants  and  original  sin ;  New  Haven 
on,  186,  190,  193,  199. 

Irish,  Church,  56,  59;  ministers,  38. 

Janeway,  Rev.  Dr.  J.  J.,  255,  284, 

285,  304,  321. 
Jennings  resolutions,  412. 
.Tunkin,  Rev.  Dr.  Geo..  433,  475,  477. 
Justice,   Divine;    younger   Edwards 

on,  178;  Beman  on,  180. 

Kingsbury,  Elder,  in  1837,  530. 


562 


INDEX. 


Kirby,  case  of  Rev.  Wm.,  472. 

Lagan  Presbytfry,  38. 

Lane  Seminary,  337. 

Lathrop.  D.  W,  258,  387. 

Lenox,  Robert,  Esq.,  511. 

Lenox,  James,  Esq.,  433,  505,  512. 

"Liberal"  sentiments;  introduce 
apostasy,  30,  56,  57;  cl^erished  by 
the  New  School,  1,  4,  10,  239,  243, 
253,  316. 

Log  College  of  Neshaminy,  98. 

Macnish,  Rev.  Geo.,  47,  48. 
Magnalia  Americana,  24,  143,  145. 
Majorities,  New  School,  404,  489.  • 
Makemie,   Rev.   Francis,  38,  45,  46, 

47,  48. 
Maryville      Theological     Seminary, 

295,  323. 
Mather,  Rev.  Cotton,  24,  143,  145. 
Mather,  Rev.  Increase,  23,  143,  145. 
Mason,  Rev.  Dr.  Erskine,  419,  514. 
Maumee  Mission,  280. 
McAuley,  Rev.  Dr.  T.,  304,  346,  359, 

419,  454,  456. 
McCalla,   Rev.  W.  L.,  304,  354,  360, 

369,  396. 
McDowell,  Rev.  Dr.  John,  415. 
McFarland,   Rev.   Dr.  Francis,  405, 

505,  514. 
McKim,  Rev.  J.  M.,  500. 
Memorial;   Western,   408;  of    1835, 

433,  of  1837,  517. 
Middle  Association,  159. 
Miller,  Rev.   Dr.  Samuel,  239,  246, 

367,  368,  436,  439,  442,  444,  457, 
478,  482,  496,  502,  514;  Letters, 
419 ;    resolution  in    Barnes'  case, 

368,  482. 

Missions ;  Chureb  a  Society,  51,  273, 
275,  276,  449,  450 ;  her  right  de- 
nied, 495  ;  efforts  to  exclude  her, 
453,  456,  ^57,  491,  495. 
A.  B.  C.  F.  M.,  301,  303,  306,  308, 
338,  404,  450,  453,  454,  456,  457, 
460,  491,  492,  494:  claims  to  be 
national,  303,  304,  307,  492. 
A.  H.  M.  S.,  311,  312,  335,  338 ; 
hostile  to  the  Assembly's  Board, 
313,  315,  319,  320,  326,  357;  plans 
of  amalgamation,  316,  321,  322, 
324,  359. 

Domestic  ;  Ours  the  earliest,  275  ; 
earliest  system,  280 ;  Board  pr- 
ganized,    281;    reorganized,    313; 


hostility  to  it,  313,  315,  319,  320, 
326,  357;  because  orthodox,  323, 
347  ;  plans  of  amalgamation  with 
A.  H.  M.  S.,  316,  321,  322,  324, 
359,  377,  378. 

Foreign ;  Our  early,  276,  297 ;  the 
earliest,  308 ;  absorbed  by  the 
American  Board,  301,  307;  For- 
eign Board  organized,  532. 
New  York  Young  Men's  Society, 
311. 

United  Domestic  Society,  311. 
United  Foreign  Society,  297;  its 
amalgamation,  301. 
Western  Society,  of  Synod  of 
Pittsburgh,  277.  Western  Foreign 
Society,  447,  454  ;  treaty  of  trans- 
fer to  the  Assembly,  461,  490  ;  its 
rejection,  491,  496. 

Moderates,  their  influence,  339,  405, 
417;  their  policy,  248,  311,  360, 
401,  427. 

"  Moderates  and  Ultra  Partisans," 
427. 

Monfort,  Rev.  Francis,  406. 

Musgrave,  Rev.  Dr.  Geo.  W.,  448, 
450. 

Neill,  Rev.  Dr.  Wm.,  291. 

Neonomianism.  See  Baxter's  "Mid- 
dle way." 

Nettleton  and  New  Haven,  184,  186, 
215. 

Nevins,  Rev.  Wm.,  448,  450. 

New  Brunswick  Presbytery  and  the 
New  Side,  100. 

New  England  churches ;  origin,  23, 
143;  doctrinal  defection,  166,  167, 
181,  213 ;  tend  toward  ludepend- 
encj',  166. 

New  England  Theology,  167,  170, 
180,  214. 

New  Haven,  seminary  founded,  187; 
Theology,  180 ;  on  subscription, 
9,  107 ;  and  Barnes,  362. 

New  Lights. — Stoneites,  133,  135. 

New  Lights.     See  New  Side. 

New  Jersey  College,  276. 

New  Measures,  an  outgrowth  of 
Taylorism,  225,  233. 

New  School ;  The  name,  viii. ;  or- 
ganization, 417,  418 ;  characteris- 
tics, 539;  and  the  Adopting  Act, 
89  :  plans,  327,  339,  418,  537,  544; 
majorities,  404,  417  ;  claim  to  the 
property,  311,  539 ;  leaders  in  the 


INDEX. 


563 


disruption,  545  ;  resolutions  of  de- 
votion to  the  standards,  413,  486  ; 
and  the  doctrinal  basis  of  reunion, 
10  ;  meetings,  503.  543,  544, 

New  Side,  96;  disorders,  98,  100; 
schism,  102;  doctrines,  100,  103, 
10  J  ;  on  subscription,  91,  93,  94, 
■103. 

Newspaper  press  and  the  Old  School, 
389,  390,  405. 

"New  Test."  discussion,  251. 

New  Theologj^,  180,  189 ;  and  Socin- 
ianism,  182. 

New  York  churches,  origin,  275. 

New  York  General  Synod,  formed, 
104;  on  subscription,  105,  106; 
and  Scotch  Church,  107. 

New  York  Third  Presbytery,  402. 

Ordixatiox  of  domestic  missionaries, 
in  the  East,  335,  4Q3,  409,  411. 

Original  sin;  Andover.  211,  212,213; 
Barnes,  348,  351,  484;  Edward 
Beecher,  473;  East  Windsor,  205; 
New  Haven,  185,  189,  191,  199; 
parody  respecting,  488. 

Pacific  Act,  Irish,  58. 

Pardovan  and  the  standards,  121. 

Parsons,  English,  in  America,  54. 

Pastoral  Union,  205. 

Patterson,  Kev.  James,  285,  336, 
400. 

Patton,  Rev,  Dr.  Wm.,  497. 

Peabody,  Rev.  James  A,,  341,  497. 

Peace  men.  247,  248,  250,  339,  375, 
405,  417,  420,  422,  427,  430,  506, 
500, 

Pelagian  revivals,  224,  231,  233. 

Perfectionism  from  Taylorism,  224. 

Persecution,  in  Scotland,  39  ;  in  Ire- 
land, 39. 

Peters.  Rev.  Dr.  Absalom,  312,  316, 
SIS,  321,  324,  357,  360,  306,  403, 
482,  496;  his  "  Plea  for  Union," 
357. 

PhiliDpi,  Dr.  Beman's  threat,  524, 
527. 

Phillips,  Rev.  Dr.  W.  W.,  433,  435, 
505. 

Pinners'  Hall,  29,  30. 

Pittsburgh  :  vSynod's  Missions,  277  ; 
overture  on  doctrinal  errors,  263, 
268. 

Plan  of  Union,  154;  was  no  cove- 
nant,  444,    523;    complained    of. 


258,  409;  abused,  162,  270,  531; 
effects    of,    166,    443;    abrogation 
demanded,  409,  443,  522;  abroga- 
tion, 529,  537. 
Of  1808,  159,  541. 

"  Plea  for  Union  in  the  West,"  357. 

Presbytery,  General.  Its  members 
Irish  and  Scotch,  49,  53;  The  roll, 
48;  The  churches,  49 ;  Its  origin, 
50  ;  Its  constitution,  49  ;  an  evan- 
gelic society,  51 ;  becomes  a  Synod, 
54. 

Presbyteries,  enrollment  of  new,  532. 

Presbyterians,  English,  20;  their 
apostasy,  30. 

Presbyterian  Education  Society.  See 
Education. 

Princeton  ;  professors'  pledge,  249 
Hopkinsians  hostile.  244,  250,  251 
and  the  Old  School,  404,  427.  509 
New  School,  designs  on,  419,  503 
527;  plan  to  abandon,  511. 

Protest,  of  1741,  101;  Rejected,  of 
1834,  413;  New  School,  on  doc- 
trinal error,  532,  542. 

Publication  Board,  plan  of  consoli- 
dation with  New  School,  5,  9. 

Publications.     See  Books. 

Realism,  xi.,  169. 

Regeneration  ;  Tavlor  on,  181,  182, 
195,  199;  Finney  on,  218, 

Ptcligion,  Low  state,  in  1730,  96. 

Representation  in  the  Assembly  un- 
equal, 405. 

Reunion,  proposed,  2.  Resolutions 
of  1866,  2.  Basis  of  1867,  4; 
Basis  of  1868,  10,  16;  Committee 
on  reunion,  3,  8  ;  Two  parties  on 
the  subject,  7,  14. 

Revival;  of  the  18th  century,  97; 
Pelagian,  231 ;  the  measures  used, 
222. 

Rice,  Rev.  Dr.  J.  H.,  448,  450,  454. 

Richards,  Rev,  Dr.  James,  240,  287, 
294,  366,  377. 

Russell,  Rev.  Joshua  F.,  325,  346. 

Saltkrs'  Hall,  29,  30. 
Sandusky  Mission,  279. 
Savoy  Confession,  141. 
Saybrook  Platform,  23,  145,  157. 
Secession   of   Old  School,  proposed, 

504,  509. 
"Secret    Circulars,"   320,    387,    395, 

506. 


664 


INDEX. 


Self-love  as  a  motive  to  salvation, 
lir,  198. 

Self-love  and  selfishness,  197,  198, 
221. 

Seminaries,  New  School;  origin  of, 
29?,,  294,  337,  512  ;  reunion,  69. 

Separation  predetermined  in  1837, 
508,  514  :  amicable  attempted,  525. 

Seward,  Rev.  J.,  163. 

Sin;  Edwards'  definition,  170,  176, 
197,  198,  221;  Fitch  on,  189;  Tay- 
lor on,  191;  Edward  Beechcr, 
Sturdevant,  and  Kirby  on,  473; 
God's  power  to  prevent,  194. 

Skinner.  Rev.  Dr.  T.  H.,  394,  482, 
483,  486,  491,  493,  497,- 513. 

Soeinian  apostasy,  35,  57,  58. 

Southern  churches,  and  the  Old 
School,  404,  517,  534. 

Spring,  Rev.  Dr.  G.,  237,  250,  271, 
361,  379. 

Squire,  Rev.  M.  P.,  549. 

"  Statement,"  of  4he  New  Haven 
professors,  208. 

Stevens,  Col.  Wm.,  38.  42. 

Stuart,  Rev.  Dr.  M.,  213. 

Sturdevant,  Rev.  J.  M.,  472. 

Subscription  to  creeds  ;   opposed,  57; 
strict,   what   implied   in,    72,  208, 
209,  210;  for   substance,    76,  188, 
208,  209,  210:  at  Princeton,  249; 
/  ■      at  Andover,  212  :  at  New  Haven, 
'  107,208;  at   East  Windsor,  205; 

by  the  Old  Side,  109  ;  by  the 
New  Side,  103;  in  Presbyterian 
Church,  always  strict,  122,  140, 
255  ;  liberal,  tends  to  apostasy,  57  ; 
and  the  Plan  of  Union,  338. 

Substance  of  doctrine,  allowed  as  to 
Discipline,  71,  86,  121.  See  Sub- 
scription. 

Swift,  Rev.  Dr.  E.  P.,  454,  456. 

Synod,  General,  organized,  54.  Its 
powers,  121,  125.  See  New 
York. 

"  System  of  doctrines,"  includes  the 
details,  73 :  subtle  meaning  at- 
tached to  the  phrase,  206,  209,  253, 
254,  413,  480,  507,  508,  509. 

Taylor,  Rev.  N.,  of  Md.,  44. 

Tavlor,  Rev.  Dr.  N.,  of  New  Haven, 
184,  188,  195, 199  ;  in  the  Assem- 
bly of  1838,  546,  550. 


Tennents,  91;  Their  character,  98 ; 
Rev.  Gilbert,  116,  117,  118;  Rev. 
John,  97. 

Testimonies  against  error,  131,  408, 
423,  434,  445,  518,  532;  condemn- 
ed, 411. 

Theology,  Improvements  in,  33. 

Thomson,  Rev.  John,  59,  61. 

Traducean  theorv,  463,  464. 

Trials  for  heresy',  118,  132,  137,  138, 
463,  470,  473,  476. 

"  Triangle,"  Whelpley's,  238. 

Tuttle,  Clement,  a  committee-man, 
366. 

Union,   of    1690,  22;    of    Old   and 

Now  Side,  115. 
Union  Seminary,  New  York,  512. 
Utica  Synod,  162,  531. 

Van  Dyke,  Rev.  Dr.,  3. 

Virginia  :  Early  churches  in,  42,  44; 

Synod's  Missions,  277. 
Voluntary    societies,   343,  434,  443, 

522,  532. 

Weatherby,  Rev.  James,  and  Dr. 

Beecher,  467. 
Western  Memorial,  408. 
Western    Missionary   Society ;    and, 
Western  Foreign  Missionary  Society. 

See  Missions. 
West  Lexington  Presbytery,  and  the 

Cincinnati  Convention,  381. 
Westminster  Assembly,  140 ;  stand- 
ards in  England,  19,  142;  on  the 

magistrate,  70.      See  Confession  ; 

and,  Subscription. 
Western    Reserve   Synod,   163,   257, 

268_,  383,  529. 
Wilmington  Presbytery,  4"09. 
Wilson,  Rev.  Dr.  J.  P.,  345. 
Wilson,   Rev.  John,  of  New   Castle, 

45  ;  a  Scotchman,  46. 
Wilson,    Rev.   Dr.  J.    L.,   336,  407, 

430,  433,  469. 
Winchester,    Rev.    S.    G.,   341,    422, 

440. 
Witherspoon,   Rev.  John,  of  S.   C. 

432,  433,  489. 
Woods,   of   Andover,  Rev.  Dr.,  18^ 

165,  200,  203,  211,  212,  213. 
Wylie,  Rev.  Dr.  Wm.,  377,  421. 


r 


DATE  DUE 


CAYLORO 


^-.-T^" 


•1. 


